Twin-field quantum key distribution with large misalignment error

Based on the novel idea of twin-field quantum key distribution [TF-QKD; Lucamarini et al., Nature (London) 557, 400 (2018)], we present a protocol named the ``sending or not sending TF-QKD'' protocol, which can tolerate large misalignment error. A revolutionary theoretical breakthrough in quantum communication, TF-QKD changes the channel-loss dependence of the key rate from linear to square root of channel transmittance. However, it demands the challenging technology of long-distance single-photon interference, and also, as stated in the original paper, the security proof was not finalized there due to the possible effects of the later announced phase information. Here we show by a concrete eavesdropping scheme that the later phase announcement does have important effects and the traditional formulas of the decoy-state method do not apply to the original protocol. We then present our ``sending or not sending'' protocol. Our protocol does not take postselection for the bits in $Z$-basis (signal pulses), and hence the traditional decoy-state method directly applies and automatically resolves the issue of security proof. Most importantly, our protocol presents a negligibly small error rate in $Z$-basis because it does not request any single-photon interference in this basis. Thus our protocol greatly improves the tolerable threshold of misalignment error in single-photon interference from the original a few percent to more than $45%$. As shown numerically, our protocol exceeds a secure distance of 700, 600, 500, or 300 km even though the single-photon interference misalignment error rate is as large as $15%, 25%, 35%$, or $45%$.

[1]  H. Bechmann-Pasquinucci,et al.  Quantum cryptography , 2001, quant-ph/0101098.

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

[3]  M. Fejer,et al.  Experimental measurement-device-independent quantum key distribution. , 2012, Physical review letters.

[4]  H. Inamori,et al.  Unconditional security of practical quantum key distribution , 2007 .

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

[6]  M. Curty,et al.  Measurement-device-independent quantum key distribution. , 2011, Physical review letters.

[7]  N. Gisin,et al.  Quantum Communication , 2007, quant-ph/0703255.

[8]  Shor,et al.  Simple proof of security of the BB84 quantum key distribution protocol , 2000, Physical review letters.

[9]  Miss A.O. Penney (b) , 1974, The New Yale Book of Quotations.

[10]  I Lucio-Martinez,et al.  Real-world two-photon interference and proof-of-principle quantum key distribution immune to detector attacks. , 2013, Physical review letters.

[11]  Hui Liu,et al.  Measurement-Device-Independent Quantum Key Distribution Over a 404 km Optical Fiber. , 2016, Physical review letters.

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

[13]  G. Guo,et al.  Measurement-device-independent quantum key distribution robust against environmental disturbances , 2017 .

[14]  A. Châtelain,et al.  The European Physical Journal D , 1999 .

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

[16]  Jian-Wei Pan,et al.  General theory of decoy-state quantum cryptography with source errors , 2006, quant-ph/0612121.

[17]  Y.-H. Zhou,et al.  Making the decoy-state measurement-device-independent quantum key distribution practically useful , 2015, 1502.01262.

[18]  Xiongfeng Ma,et al.  Phase-Matching Quantum Key Distribution , 2018, Physical Review X.

[19]  J. F. Dynes,et al.  Overcoming the rate–distance limit of quantum key distribution without quantum repeaters , 2018, Nature.

[20]  Stefano Pirandola,et al.  Side-channel-free quantum key distribution. , 2011, Physical review letters.

[21]  R. Penty,et al.  Quantum key distribution without detector vulnerabilities using optically seeded lasers , 2015, Nature Photonics.