Skip to main content

Quantum Key Distribution as a Service and Its Injection into TLS

  • Conference paper
  • First Online:
Information Security Practice and Experience (ISPEC 2023)

Abstract

Quantum key distribution (QKD) is a key agreement method that relies on the laws of physics and ensures that the keys have not been eavesdropped on or modified by a third party. While commercial QKD devices are available, they are expensive, require specific infrastructure, and have high operational expenses. In this paper, we propose an architecture and a set of protocols that allow us to implement QKD as a service (QaaS). End users communicate with QaaS via classical TLS channels secured with post-quantum cryptography (PQC). We show how to further strengthen the security of these classical links to make them sustainable to active attacks (classical and quantum) on any single segment of QaaS. We also show how to integrate QaaS into the state-of-the-art TLS 1.3 protocol. As a result, QKD becomes available for a larger community of end-users. Furthermore, we show how QaaS can reduce the number of digital signatures within a TLS 1.3 handshake, which is essential since post-quantum signatures are much longer than the conventional RSA/ECC-based ones.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this chapter

Chapter
USD 29.95
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
eBook
USD 79.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as EPUB and PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
Softcover Book
USD 99.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Compact, lightweight edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Institutional subscriptions

Similar content being viewed by others

Notes

  1. 1.

    Coherent One-Way protocol, patented by IDQ.

  2. 2.

    e.g., Toshiba Multiplexed and Long Distance, IDQ Clavis and Cerberis series, QTI Quell-X, LuxQuanta NOVA LQ, KEEQUANT Andariel, SeQre Aurora and Eclipse.

  3. 3.

    unless the link is physically broken, a hardware failure occurs, or there is constant eavesdropping or intrusion.

  4. 4.

    quantum random number generator.

  5. 5.

    One of the benefits of the equivalence property is that there is no advantage in attacking either of KDCs. Another benefit is the ability to design algorithms and protocols that can purposely choose the first receiver of the reserveKeyAndGetKeyHalf message.

  6. 6.

    TLS 1.3 terminology; actually, it is a key exchange method.

  7. 7.

    We choose T such that each of the three connections at the longest path (Aija \(\leftrightarrow \) User 1 \(\leftrightarrow \) User 2 \(\leftrightarrow \) Brencis) can survive the maximal TCP back-off; \(T\approx 3\times 30\) s \(\approx 3\times \) TCP re-transmission timeout for five tries.

  8. 8.

    A key is called a “zombie” if it is being stored at one KDC endpoint but is not present at the other, i.e., it has been reserved and deleted or hasn’t been received at all (due to server restart or network interruption). “Zombie” keys can also be deleted before TTL expires, e.g., by the Control Protocol.

  9. 9.

    e.g., due to too many key reservation requests or due to some technical failure, when new keys stop appearing from the QKD device.

  10. 10.

    A client can generate a key pair by himself and send a certificate signing request (CSR) to the CA, or the whole process can be performed by the CA.

  11. 11.

    https://jwt.io.

  12. 12.

    Technically, any string, e.g., a URI, can be used to identify the communicating parties. In this paper, we use the term “domain name” to represent such strings.

  13. 13.

    In the case of client certificates, the traditional certificate-based domain name validation is performed. In the case of JWT tokens, the check is performed by a database lookup or by verifying the hash-based JWT signature.

  14. 14.

    BouncyCastle provides pure Java implementations of cryptographic primitives, including the majority of PQC algorithms from NIST Rounds 3 and 4 in the latest releases. BouncyCastle can be downloaded from https://www.bouncycastle.org/java.html.

  15. 15.

    Our scripts for building such HAProxy are available at https://github.com/LUMII-Syslab/oqs-haproxy.

  16. 16.

    We used the same approach in our quantum random number generator service https://qrng.lumii.lv [15].

  17. 17.

    We use TLS v1.3 since it supports KEMs and reduces the number of round-trips in a TLS handshake. KEMs are promoted by NIST, while TLS is an IETF standard supported by all browsers and networking libraries.

  18. 18.

    https://github.com/open-quantum-safe/liboqs-java.

  19. 19.

    NIST PQC Round 3 winner, to be standardized.

  20. 20.

    NIST PQC Round 3 candidate, not participating in Round 4 but invented by renowned scientists.

  21. 21.

    since it is a standard, which is already being used for keys and certificates.

  22. 22.

    thus, hash functions can be upgraded in the future.

  23. 23.

    See also: https://github.com/LUMII-Syslab/qkd-as-a-service.

  24. 24.

    See also: https://www.qkdnetsim.info and http://open-qkd.eu.

References

  1. Alagic, G., et al.: Status report on the third round of the NIST post-quantum cryptography standardization process. Technical report, NISTIR 8413, NIST (2022)

    Google Scholar 

  2. Bennett, C.H., Brassard, G.: Quantum cryptography: public key distribution and coin tossing. In: Proceedings of IEEE International Conference on Computers, Systems and Signal Processing, vol. 175, p. 8 New York (1984)

    Google Scholar 

  3. Castryck, W., Decru, T.: An efficient key recovery attack on SIDH (2022). https://eprint.iacr.org/2022/975. Cryptology ePrint Archive, Paper 2022/975

  4. Dervisevic, E., Mehic, M.: Overview of quantum key distribution technique within IPsec architecture. In: Proceedings of the 18th International ISCRAM Conference, pp. 391–403 (2021)

    Google Scholar 

  5. Dubrova, E., Ngo, K., Grtner, J.: Breaking a fifth-order masked implementation of CRYSTALS-Kyber by copy-paste (2022). https://eprint.iacr.org/2022/1713. Cryptology ePrint Archive, Paper 2022/1713

  6. Gao, R.Q., et al.: Simple security proof of coherent-one-way quantum key distribution. Opt. Express 30(13), 23783–23795 (2022)

    Article  MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  7. Guo, Q., Johansson, A., Johansson, T.: A key-recovery side-channel attack on classic McEliece implementations. IACR Trans. Cryptographic Hardw. Embed. Syst., 800–827 (2022). https://doi.org/10.46586/tches.v2022.i4.800-827

  8. Guo, Q., Nabokov, D., Nilsson, A., Johansson, T.: SCA-LDPC: a code-based framework for key-recovery side-channel attacks on post-quantum encryption schemes (2023). https://eprint.iacr.org/2023/294. Cryptology ePrint Archive, Paper 2023/294

  9. IDQ: Telecom Service Provider: 100G encryption with OKD (use case brochure) (2017). https://www.idquantique.com/resource_type/quantum-safe-security/

  10. IDQ: ID Quantique partners with ADVA to commercialise a quantum-safe encryption solution (press release) (2019). https://www.idquantique.com/id-quantiquepartners-with-adva-to-commercialise-a-quantum-safe-encryption-solution/

  11. IDQ: Redefining Security: Clavis XG QKD System (2022). https://www.idquantique.com/quantum-safe-security/products/clavis-xg-qkdsystem/

  12. IETF Standard: X.509 Internet Public Key Infrastructure: Online Certificate Status Protocol - OCSP (RFC 6960) (2013)

    Google Scholar 

  13. Jacak, M., Jacak, J., Jwiak, P., Jwiak, I.: Quantum cryptography: theoretical protocols for quantum key distribution and tests of selected commercial QKD systems in commercial fiber networks. Int. J. Quantum Inf. 14(02), 1630002 (2016)

    Article  MATH  Google Scholar 

  14. Kozlovis, S.: The web computer and its operating system: a new approach for creating web applications. In: Proceedings of the 15th International Conference on Web Information Systems and Technologies (WEBIST 2019), Vienna, Austria, pp. 46–57. SCITEPRESS (2019)

    Google Scholar 

  15. Kozlovis, S., Vksna, J.: POSTER: a transparent remote quantum random number generator over a quantum-safe link. In: Zhou, J., et al. (eds.) Applied Cryptography and Network Security Workshops. LNCS, vol. 13285, pp. 595–599. Springer International Publishing, Cham (2022). https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-031-16815-4_32

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  16. Lo, H.K., Ma, X., Chen, K.: Decoy state quantum key distribution. Phys. Rev. Lett. 94(23), 230504 (2005). https://doi.org/10.1103/PhysRevLett.94.230504

    Article  Google Scholar 

  17. Mailloux, L.O., Hodson, D.D., Grimaila, M.R., Engle, R.D., Mclaughlin, C.V., Baumgartner, G.B.: Using modeling and simulation to study photon number splitting attacks. IEEE Access : Pract. Innovations Open Solutions 4, 2188–2197 (2016)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  18. Mehic, M., Maurhart, O., Rass, S., Voznak, M.: Implementation of quantum key distribution network simulation module in the network simulator NS-3. Quantum Inf. Process. 16(10), 253 (2017)

    Article  MathSciNet  MATH  Google Scholar 

  19. Mehic, M., et al.: Quantum key distribution: a networking perspective. ACM Comput. Surv. 53(5), 1–41 (2021)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  20. Neppach, A., et al.: Key management of quantum generated keys in IPsec. In: Proceedings of the 3rd International SECRYPT Conference, pp. 177–183 (2008)

    Google Scholar 

  21. Schwabe, P., Stebila, D., Wiggers, T.: Post-quantum TLS without handshake signatures. In: Proceedings of the 2020 ACM SIGSAC Conference on Computer and Communications Security, pp. 1461–1480. ACM, Virtual Event USA (2020)

    Google Scholar 

  22. Stanley, M., Gui, Y., Unnikrishnan, D., Hall, S., Fatadin, I.: Recent progress in quantum key distribution network deployments and standards. J. Phys: Conf. Ser. 2416(1), 012001 (2022)

    Google Scholar 

  23. Stebila, D., Mosca, M.: Post-quantum key exchange for the internet and the open quantum safe project. In: Avanzi, R., Heys, H. (eds.) SAC 2016. LNCS, vol. 10532, pp. 14–37. Springer International Publishing, Cham (2017). https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-69453-5_2

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  24. Wang, L.J., et al.: Experimental authentication of quantum key distribution with post-quantum cryptography. npj Quantum Inf. 7(1), 67 (2021)

    Google Scholar 

  25. Wimmer, C.: GraalVM native image: large-scale static analysis for Java (keynote). In: Proceedings of the 13th ACM SIGPLAN International Workshop on Virtual Machines and Intermediate Languages, pp. 3–3. ACM (2021)

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgements

Research supported by the European Regional Development Fund, project No. 1.1.1.1/20/A/106 “Applications of quantum cryptography devices and software solutions in computational infrastructure framework in Latvia”.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Sergejs Kozlovičs .

Editor information

Editors and Affiliations

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2023 The Author(s), under exclusive license to Springer Nature Singapore Pte Ltd.

About this paper

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this paper

Kozlovičs, S., Petručeņa, K., Lāriņš, D., Vīksna, J. (2023). Quantum Key Distribution as a Service and Its Injection into TLS. In: Meng, W., Yan, Z., Piuri, V. (eds) Information Security Practice and Experience. ISPEC 2023. Lecture Notes in Computer Science, vol 14341. Springer, Singapore. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-981-99-7032-2_31

Download citation

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-981-99-7032-2_31

  • Published:

  • Publisher Name: Springer, Singapore

  • Print ISBN: 978-981-99-7031-5

  • Online ISBN: 978-981-99-7032-2

  • eBook Packages: Computer ScienceComputer Science (R0)

Publish with us

Policies and ethics