Abstract
After carrying out a protocol for quantum key agreement over a noisy quantum channel, the parties Alice and Bob must process the raw key in order to end up with identical keys about which the adversary has virtually no information. In principle, both classical and quantum protocols can be used for this processing. It is a natural question which type of protocols is more powerful. We show that the limits of tolerable noise are identical for classical and quantum protocols in many cases. More specifically, we prove that a quantum state between two parties is entangled if and only if the classical random variables resulting from optimal measurements provide some mutual classical information between the parties. In addition, we present evidence which strongly suggests that the potentials of classical and of quantum protocols are equal in every situation. An important consequence, in the purely classical regime, of such a correspondence would be the existence of a classical counterpart of so-called bound entanglement, namely “bound information” that cannot be used for generating a secret key by any protocol. This stands in sharp contrast to what was previously believed.
Chapter PDF
Similar content being viewed by others
Keywords
References
H. Bechmann-Pasquinucci and N. Gisin, Incoherent and coherent eavesdropping in the six-state protocol of quantum cryptography, Phys. Rev. A, Vol. 59, No. 6, pp. 4238–4248, 1999.
C. H. Bennett, G. Brassard, S. Popescu, B. Schumacher, J. A. Smolin, and W. K. Wooters, Purification of noisy entanglement and faithful teleportation via noisy channels, Phys. Rev. Lett., Vol. 76, pp. 722–725, 1996.
C. H. Bennett and G. Brassard, Quantum cryptography: public key distribution and coin tossing, Proceedings of the IEEE International Conference on Computer, Systems, and Signal Processing, IEEE, pp. 175–179, 1984.
D. Bruss, Optimal eavesdropping in quantum cryptography with six states, Phys. Rev. Lett., Vol. 81, No. 14, pp. 3018–3021, 1998.
V. Bužek and M. Hillery, Quantum copying: beyond the no-cloning theorem, Phys. Rev. A, Vol. 54, pp. 1844–1852, 1996.
J. F. Clauser, M. A. Horne, A. Shimony and R. A. Holt, Proposed experiment to test local hidden-variable theories, Phys. Rev. Lett., Vol. 23, pp. 880–884, 1969.
I. Csiszár and J. Körner, Broadcast channels with confidential messages, IEEE Transactions on Information Theory, Vol. IT-24, pp. 339–348, 1978.
D. Deutsch, A. Ekert, R. Jozsa, C. Macchiavello, S. Popescu, and A. Sanpera, Quantum privacy amplification and the security of quantum cryptography over noisy channels, Phys. Rev. Lett., Vol. 77, pp. 2818–2821, 1996.
D. P. DiVincenzo, P. W. Shor, J. A. Smolin, B. M. Terhal, and A. V. Thapliyal, Evidence for bound entangled states with negative partial transpose, quant-ph/9910026, 1999.
A. E. Ekert, Quantum cryptography based on Bell’s theorem, Phys. Rev. Lett., Vol. 67, pp. 661–663, 1991. See also Physics World, March 1998.
C. Fuchs, N. Gisin, R. B. Griffiths, C. S. Niu, and A. Peres, Optimal eavesdropping in quantum cryptography-I: information bound and optimal strategy, Phys. Rev. A, Vol. 56, pp. 1163–1172, 1997.
N. Gisin, Stochastic quantum dynamics and relativity, Helv. Phys. Acta, Vol. 62, pp. 363–371, 1989.
N. Gisin and B. Huttner, Quantum cloning, eavesdropping, and Bell inequality, Phys. Lett. A, Vol. 228, pp. 13–21, 1997.
N. Gisin and S. Massar, Optimal quantum cloning machines, Phys. Rev. Lett., Vol. 79, pp. 2153–2156, 1997.
N. Gisin and S. Wolf, Quantum cryptography on noisy channels: quantum versus classical key agreement protocols, Phys. Rev. Lett., Vol. 83, pp. 4200–4203, 1999.
M. Horodecki, P. Horodecki, and R. Horodecki, Mixed-state entanglement and distillation: is there a “bound” entanglement in nature?, Phys. Rev. Lett., Vol. 80, pp. 5239–5242, 1998.
P. Horodecki, Separability criterion and inseparable mixed states with positive partial transposition, Phys. Lett. A, Vol. 232, p. 333, 1997.
P. Horodecki, M. Horodecki, and R. Horodecki, Bound entanglement can be activated, Phys. Rev. Lett., Vol. 82, pp. 1056–1059, 1999. quant-ph/9806058.
L. P. Hughston, R. Jozsa, and W. K. Wootters, A complete classification of quantum ensembles having a given density matrix, Phys. Lett. A, Vol. 183, pp. 14–18, 1993.
U. Maurer, Secret key agreement by public discussion from common information, IEEE Transactions on Information Theory, Vol. 39, No. 3, pp. 733–742, 1993.
U. Maurer and S. Wolf, Information-theoretic key agreement: from weak to strong secrecy for free, Proceedings of EUROCRYPT 2000, Lecture Notes in Computer Science, Vol. 1807, pp. 352–368, Springer-Verlag, 2000.
U. Maurer and S. Wolf, Unconditionally secure key agreement and the intrinsic conditional information, IEEE Transactions on Information Theory, Vol. 45, No. 2, pp. 499–514, 1999.
N. D. Mermin, The Ithaca interpretation of quantum mechanics, Pramana, Vol. 51, pp. 549–565, 1998.
A. Peres, Quantum theory: concepts and methods, Kluwer Academic Publishers, 1993.
A. Peres, Separability criterion for density matrices, Phys. Rev. Lett., Vol. 77, pp. 1413–1415, 1996.
S. Popescu and D. Rohrlich, Thermodynamics and the measure of entanglement, quant-ph/9610044, 1996.
G. Ribordy, J. D. Gautier, N. Gisin, O. Guinnard, and H. Zbinden, Automated plug and play quantum key distribution, Electron. Lett., Vol. 34, pp. 2116–2117, 1998.
C. E. Shannon, Communication theory of secrecy systems, Bell System Technical Journal, Vol. 28, pp. 656–715, 1949.
S. Wolf, Information-theoretically and computationally secure key agreement in cryptography, ETH dissertation No. 13138, Swiss Federal Institute of Technology (ETH Zurich), May 1999.
A. D. Wyner, The wire-tap channel, Bell System Technical Journal, Vol. 54, No. 8, pp. 1355–1387, 1975.
H. Zbinden, H. Bechmann, G. Ribordy, and N. Gisin, Quantum cryptography, Applied Physics B, Vol. 67, pp. 743–748, 1998.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Editor information
Editors and Affiliations
Rights and permissions
Copyright information
© 2000 Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg
About this paper
Cite this paper
Gisin, N., Wolf, S. (2000). Linking Classical and Quantum Key Agreement: Is There “Bound Information”?. In: Bellare, M. (eds) Advances in Cryptology — CRYPTO 2000. CRYPTO 2000. Lecture Notes in Computer Science, vol 1880. Springer, Berlin, Heidelberg. https://doi.org/10.1007/3-540-44598-6_30
Download citation
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/3-540-44598-6_30
Published:
Publisher Name: Springer, Berlin, Heidelberg
Print ISBN: 978-3-540-67907-3
Online ISBN: 978-3-540-44598-2
eBook Packages: Springer Book Archive