You're viewing papers too quickly. Please wait a moment.<br>This helps keep the archive available for everyone.

Quick Navigation

Topics

Quantum Cryptography Security

Countermeasure against quantum hacking using detection statistics

arXiv
Authors: Gaëtan Gras, Davide Rusca, Hugo Zbinden, Félix Bussières

Year

2020

Paper ID

19892

Status

Preprint

Abstract Read

~2 min

Abstract Words

110

Citations

N/A

Abstract

Detector blinding attacks have been proposed in the last few years, and they could potentially threaten the security of QKD systems. Even though no complete QKD system has been hacked yet, it is nevertheless important to consider countermeasures to avoid information leakage. In this paper, we present a new countermeasure against these kind of attacks based on the use of multi-pixel detectors. We show that with this method, we are able to estimate an upper bound on the information an eavesdropper could have on the key exchanged. Finally, we test a multi-pixel detector based on SNSPDs to show it can fulfill all the requirement for our countermeasure to be effective.

Why This Paper Matters

  • This paper contributes to the Quantum Cryptography & Security research area in the Quantum Articles archive.
  • It adds a 2020 reference point for readers tracking recent quantum research.
  • Detector blinding attacks have been proposed in the last few years, and they could potentially threaten the security of QKD systems.

Paper Tools

Become a member to use research tools

Sign in to open papers, visit source links, share, cite, compare, copy DOI links, request category corrections, and build your reading list.

Show Paper arXiv Publisher Share Cite This Paper Copy URL Compare Copy DOI Add to Reading List Category Correction Request

References & Citation Signals

Local Citation Graph (Related-Paper Links)

Current Paper #19892

External citation index: OpenAlex citation signal

Community Reactions

Quick sentiment from readers on this paper.

Score: 0
Likes: 0 Dislikes: 0

Sign in to react to this paper.

Discussion & Reviews (Moderated)

Average Rating: 0.0 / 5 (0 ratings)

No written reviews yet.