Quick Navigation
Topics
Quantum Cryptography Security
Authentication in Security Proofs for Quantum Key Distribution
arXiv
Authors: Devashish Tupkary, Shlok Nahar, Ernest Y. -Z. Tan
Year
2026
Paper ID
3360
Status
Preprint
Abstract Read
~2 min
Abstract Words
168
Citations
N/A
Abstract
Quantum Key Distribution (QKD) protocols rely on authenticated classical communication. Typical QKD security proofs are carried out in an idealized setting where authentication is assumed to behave honestly: it never aborts, and all classical messages are delivered faithfully with their original timing preserved. Authenticated channels that can be constructed in practice have different properties. Most critically, such channels may abort asymmetrically, such that only the receiving party may detect an authentication failure while the sending party remains unaware. Furthermore, an adversary may delay, reorder, or block classical messages. This discrepancy renders the standard QKD security definition and existing QKD security proofs invalid in the practical authentication setting. In this work we resolve this issue. Our main result is a reduction theorem showing that, under mild and easily satisfied protocol conditions, any QKD protocol proven secure under the honest authentication setting remains secure under a practical authentication setting. This result allows all existing QKD proofs to be retroactively lifted to the practical authentication setting with a minor protocol tweak.
Why This Paper Matters
- This paper contributes to the Quantum Cryptography & Security research area in the Quantum Articles archive.
- It adds a 2026 reference point for readers tracking recent quantum research.
- Quantum Key Distribution (QKD) protocols rely on authenticated classical communication.
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
Category Correction Request
Help us improve classification quality by proposing a better category. Every request is reviewed by an admin.
Sign in to submit a category correction request for this paper.
Log In to SubmitReferences & Citation Signals
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.