Finite-key security analysis of the 1-decoy state QKD protocol with a leaky intensity modulator

The finite-key security of the standard three-intensity decoy-state quantum key distribution (QKD) protocol in the presence of information leakage has been analyzed (Wang et al. in New J Phys 20:083027, 2018). On the other hand, the 1-decoy state QKD protocol has been proved to be able to achieve higher secret key rate than the three-intensity decoy-state QKD protocol in the finite-key regime by using only two different intensity settings (Davide et al. in Appl Phys Lett 112:171104, 2018). In this work, we analyze the finite-key security of the 1-decoy state QKD protocol with a leaky intensity modulator, which is used to generate the decoy state. In particular, we simulate the secret key rate under three practical cases of Trojan-horse attacks. Our simulation results demonstrate that the 1-decoy state QKD protocol can be secure over long distances within a reasonable time frame given that the intensity modulator is sufficiently isolated. By comparing the simulation results to those presented in Wang et al. (2018), we find that, as expected, the 1-decoy state QKD protocol is more robust against information leakage from the intensity modulator for all achievable distances.

[1]  Andrew J. Shields,et al.  Long-distance quantum key distribution secure against coherent attacks , 2017 .

[2]  V. Scarani,et al.  The security of practical quantum key distribution , 2008, 0802.4155.

[3]  Feihu Xu,et al.  Concise security bounds for practical decoy-state quantum key distribution , 2013, 1311.7129.

[4]  M. Curty,et al.  Secure quantum key distribution , 2014, Nature Photonics.

[5]  Kazuoki Azuma.  WEIGHTED SUMS OF CERTAIN DEPENDENT RANDOM VARIABLES , 1967 .

[6]  Xiang‐Bin Wang,et al.  Beating the PNS attack in practical quantum cryptography , 2004 .

[7]  Yi Zhao,et al.  Experimental quantum key distribution with decoy states. , 2006, Physical review letters.

[8]  H. Weinfurter,et al.  Experimental Demonstration of Free-Space Decoy-State Quantum Key Distribution over 144 km , 2007, 2007 European Conference on Lasers and Electro-Optics and the International Quantum Electronics Conference.

[9]  J. Dynes,et al.  Unconditionally secure one-way quantum key distribution using decoy pulses , 2007, 2007 Quantum Electronics and Laser Science Conference.

[10]  C. G. Peterson,et al.  Long-distance decoy-state quantum key distribution in optical fiber. , 2006, Physical review letters.

[11]  Akihiro Mizutani,et al.  Finite-key security analysis of quantum key distribution with imperfect light sources , 2015, 1504.08151.

[12]  Jian-Wei Pan,et al.  Experimental long-distance decoy-state quantum key distribution based on polarization encoding. , 2006, Physical review letters.

[13]  Marco Lucamarini,et al.  Decoy-state quantum key distribution with a leaky source , 2016, New Journal of Physics.

[14]  I. Chuang,et al.  Quantum Computation and Quantum Information: Bibliography , 2010 .

[15]  Won-Young Hwang.  Quantum key distribution with high loss: toward global secure communication. , 2003, Physical review letters.

[16]  Jian Wang,et al.  Decoy-state quantum key distribution with polarized photons over 200 km. , 2009, Optics express.

[17]  Marco Tomamichel,et al.  Tight finite-key analysis for quantum cryptography , 2011, Nature Communications.

[18]  Gilles Brassard,et al.  Quantum cryptography: Public key distribution and coin tossing , 2014, Theor. Comput. Sci..

[19]  Marcos Curty,et al.  Finite-key security analysis for quantum key distribution with leaky sources , 2018, New Journal of Physics.

[20]  R. Serfling.  Probability Inequalities for the Sum in Sampling without Replacement , 1974 .

[21]  Wei Cui,et al.  Finite-key analysis for measurement-device-independent quantum key distribution , 2013, Nature Communications.

[22]  Hugo Zbinden,et al.  Finite-key analysis for the 1-decoy state QKD protocol , 2018, 1801.03443.

[23]  James F. Dynes,et al.  Practical security bounds against the Trojan-horse attack in quantum key distribution , 2015, 1506.01989.

[24]  Xiongfeng Ma,et al.  Decoy state quantum key distribution. , 2004, Physical review letters.

[25]  Jian-Wei Pan,et al.  Decoy-state quantum key distribution with polarized photons over 200 km. , 2010, Optics express.

[26]  Yongmei Huang,et al.  Satellite-to-ground quantum key distribution , 2017, Nature.