Composable and Finite Computational Security of Quantum Message Transmission
August 09, 2019 Β· Declared Dead Β· π IACR Cryptology ePrint Archive
"No code URL or promise found in abstract"
Evidence collected by the PWNC Scanner
Authors
Fabio Banfi, Ueli Maurer, Christopher Portmann, Jiamin Zhu
arXiv ID
1908.03436
Category
quant-ph: Quantum Computing
Cross-listed
cs.CR
Citations
3
Venue
IACR Cryptology ePrint Archive
Last Checked
4 months ago
Abstract
Recent research in quantum cryptography has led to the development of schemes that encrypt and authenticate quantum messages with computational security. The security definitions used so far in the literature are asymptotic, game-based, and not known to be composable. We show how to define finite, composable, computational security for secure quantum message transmission. The new definitions do not involve any games or oracles, they are directly operational: a scheme is secure if it transforms an insecure channel and a shared key into an ideal secure channel from Alice to Bob, i.e., one which only allows Eve to block messages and learn their size, but not change them or read them. By modifying the ideal channel to provide Eve with more or less capabilities, one gets an array of different security notions. By design these transformations are composable, resulting in composable security. Crucially, the new definitions are finite. Security does not rely on the asymptotic hardness of a computational problem. Instead, one proves a finite reduction: if an adversary can distinguish the constructed (real) channel from the ideal one (for some fixed security parameters), then she can solve a finite instance of some computational problem. Such a finite statement is needed to make security claims about concrete implementations. We then prove that (slightly modified versions of) protocols proposed in the literature satisfy these composable definitions. And finally, we study the relations between some game-based definitions and our composable ones. In particular, we look at notions of quantum authenticated encryption and QCCA2, and show that they suffer from the same issues as their classical counterparts: they exclude certain protocols which are arguably secure.
Community Contributions
Found the code? Know the venue? Think something is wrong? Let us know!
π Similar Papers
In the same crypt β Quantum Computing
R.I.P.
π»
Ghosted
R.I.P.
π»
Ghosted
Quantum machine learning: a classical perspective
R.I.P.
π»
Ghosted
Noise-Adaptive Compiler Mappings for Noisy Intermediate-Scale Quantum Computers
R.I.P.
π»
Ghosted
ProjectQ: An Open Source Software Framework for Quantum Computing
R.I.P.
π»
Ghosted
Quantum Recommendation Systems
R.I.P.
π»
Ghosted
Traffic flow optimization using a quantum annealer
Died the same way β π» Ghosted
R.I.P.
π»
Ghosted
Federated Learning: Strategies for Improving Communication Efficiency
R.I.P.
π»
Ghosted
In-Datacenter Performance Analysis of a Tensor Processing Unit
R.I.P.
π»
Ghosted
Deep Convolutional Neural Networks for Computer-Aided Detection: CNN Architectures, Dataset Characteristics and Transfer Learning
R.I.P.
π»
Ghosted