|
|
|
|
|
by NoKnowledge
1571 days ago
|
|
The article suggests that quantum key distribution (QKD) is a replacement for a courier, but that is not true. Distributing an initial small secret key (which allows authenticity of the post-processing of the quantum measurements) is still required. Also I think the added value of device-independence is overstated. While it does indeed prevent loss of security by faulty quantum hardware (even if constructed maliciously), there is still a lot of classical post-processing required. That device still needs to be trusted.
For example, when the device is outputting the shared key, it still needs to be trusted that it isn't also delivering that key back to Eve. |
|
Is checking authenticity needed if you’re communicating with just one party?
From what I understood from the article the data received can be assumed to be random and private between two parties if a high enough win rate is achieved.
Or is checking authenticity to guard against another party taking the entangled particles but not the key used for authenticating?
FYI I don’t have very strong knowledge in this area.