pith. sign in

arxiv: 2602.23261 · v2 · submitted 2026-02-26 · 💻 cs.CR

Strengthening security and noise resistance in one-way quantum key distribution protocols through hypercube-based quantum walks

David Polzoni , Tommaso Bianchi , Mauro Conti This is my paper

Pith reviewed 2026-05-15 18:51 UTC · model grok-4.3

classification 💻 cs.CR
keywords quantum key distributionquantum walkshypercube topologyone-way protocolnoise resistancesecurity enhancementQiskit simulation
0
0 comments X

The pith

Hypercube-based quantum walks strengthen security and noise resistance in one-way quantum key distribution compared to circular topologies.

A machine-rendered reading of the paper's core claim, the machinery that carries it, and where it could break.

The paper establishes that one-way quantum key distribution achieves better protection by running the quantum walk on a hypercube graph rather than the standard circular graph. Under matching parameters the hypercube version resists eavesdropping more effectively and maintains performance in the presence of noise. This approach matters because it improves practical viability without altering the core protocol mechanics. The authors back the claim with noise-aware simulations and release an open-source toolkit built on Qiskit to allow direct comparison and further testing.

Core claim

The central claim is that a one-way QKD protocol whose security rests on the topology of a discrete-time quantum walk delivers significantly higher secure key rates and greater noise tolerance when the walk is performed on a hypercube rather than on a circle, because the topology itself sets the security properties independent of other protocol details.

What carries the argument

The hypercube topology for the discrete-time quantum walk, which structures the coin and position space so that the walk evolution produces stronger bounds on information leakage to an eavesdropper.

If this is right

  • The same protocol parameters can be used over noisier channels while still generating secure keys.
  • Secure key rates rise for a fixed number of walk steps or qubits.
  • Security analysis of one-way QKD can be reduced to choosing and analyzing the walk graph.
  • The released simulation framework supports rapid testing of additional topologies.

Where Pith is reading between the lines

These are editorial extensions of the paper, not claims the author makes directly.

  • Graph choice may become a first-class design parameter for quantum-walk cryptographic schemes.
  • The method could extend to other quantum communication tasks that rely on controlled state evolution.
  • Devices with native hypercube connectivity might realize the reported gains with lower overhead.

Load-bearing premise

Security and noise resistance in this one-way QKD protocol depend exclusively on the quantum walk topology and not on other implementation details.

What would settle it

A side-by-side simulation or experiment that runs both topologies with identical step count, identical noise model, and identical eavesdropping strategy, then checks whether the hypercube version produces a measurably higher secure key rate.

Figures

Figures reproduced from arXiv: 2602.23261 by David Polzoni, Mauro Conti, Tommaso Bianchi.

Figure 1
Figure 1. Figure 1: Example of a hypercube-based one-way QKD protocol with [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p005_1.png] view at source ↗
Figure 2
Figure 2. Figure 2: Minimal security parameter c obtained for each position space dimension P in the circle topology, using ϕ = 0, θ = π/4, and F = I. It is important to note that a smaller value of c is more advantageous for Alice and Bob. Additionally, P represents the dimension of the position space. This serves as our state-of-the-art, from which we begin our analysis to improve performance. amplitudes to either even or o… view at source ↗
Figure 3
Figure 3. Figure 3: Comparison plot between hypercube and circle-based quantum walks [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p007_3.png] view at source ↗
Figure 4
Figure 4. Figure 4: Comparison of the maximally tolerated QER for circle and hypercube [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p008_4.png] view at source ↗
Figure 5
Figure 5. Figure 5: Comparison of the maximum tolerated QER for circle-based and [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p008_5.png] view at source ↗
Figure 7
Figure 7. Figure 7: Schematic representation of the entanglement-based one-way QKD [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p010_7.png] view at source ↗
Figure 8
Figure 8. Figure 8: Qiskit complete implementation of a circle-based quantum walk: [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p010_8.png] view at source ↗
Figure 9
Figure 9. Figure 9: Qiskit complete implementation of a hypercube-based quantum walk [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p010_9.png] view at source ↗
read the original abstract

Quantum Key Distribution (QKD) is a foundational cryptographic protocol that ensures information-theoretic security. However, classical protocols such as BB84, though favored for their simplicity, offer limited resistance to eavesdropping, and perform poorly under realistic noise conditions. Recent research has explored the use of discrete-time Quantum Walks (QWs) to enhance QKD schemes. In this work, we specifically focus on a one-way QKD protocol, where security depends exclusively on the underlying Quantum Walk (QW) topology, rather than the details of the protocol itself. Our paper introduces a novel protocol based on QWs over a hypercube topology and demonstrates that, under identical parameters, it provides significantly enhanced security and noise resistance compared to the circular topology (i.e., state-of-the-art), thereby strengthening protection against eavesdropping. Furthermore, we introduce an efficient and extensible simulation framework for one-way QKD protocols based on QWs, supporting both circular and hypercube topologies. Implemented with IBM's software development kit for quantum computing (i.e., Qiskit), our toolkit enables noise-aware analysis under realistic noise models. To support reproducibility and future developments, we release our entire simulation framework as open-source. This contribution establishes a foundation for the design of topology-aware QKD protocols that combine enhanced noise tolerance with topologically driven security.

Editorial analysis

A structured set of objections, weighed in public.

Desk editor's note, referee report, simulated authors' rebuttal, and a circularity audit. Tearing a paper down is the easy half of reading it; the pith above is the substance, this is the friction.

Referee Report

3 major / 2 minor

Summary. The manuscript proposes a one-way QKD protocol that employs discrete-time quantum walks on a hypercube graph. It asserts that security and noise resistance are determined exclusively by the QW topology and that, under identical parameters, the hypercube yields significantly better performance against eavesdropping than the circular topology used in prior work. The paper also presents an open-source Qiskit-based simulation framework supporting both topologies and realistic noise models.

Significance. If the topology-isolation claim is rigorously verified, the result would be significant for QKD design: it would establish graph structure as an independent lever for security and noise tolerance, independent of coin operators or measurement bases. The released simulation toolkit would further enable reproducible exploration of topology-aware protocols.

major comments (3)
  1. [Abstract, §3] Abstract and §3 (protocol definition): the central claim that 'security depends exclusively on the underlying Quantum Walk (QW) topology' requires an explicit demonstration that every other element—initial state, coin operator, shift operator, number of steps, measurement bases, and key-sifting rule—remains bitwise identical when the adjacency matrix is switched from cycle to hypercube. No parameter-matching table or pseudocode confirming this isolation is referenced.
  2. [§4] §4 (simulation results): the abstract asserts 'significantly enhanced security and noise resistance' yet supplies no quantitative metrics (e.g., secret-key rate, eavesdropper information, error-rate thresholds, or statistical error bars). Without these numbers and the precise definition of 'identical parameters,' the magnitude of the claimed improvement cannot be evaluated.
  3. [§4.2] §4.2 (noise models): the noise-resistance comparison must specify whether the same Kraus operators and decoherence rates are applied to both topologies; any difference in effective noise strength would confound attribution to topology alone.
minor comments (2)
  1. [§5] The open-source release is a positive contribution; the repository link and installation instructions should appear in the main text rather than only in a footnote.
  2. [§3, Appendix] Notation for the hypercube adjacency matrix and the coin operator should be unified between the protocol description and the simulation code listing.

Simulated Author's Rebuttal

3 responses · 0 unresolved

We thank the referee for the constructive comments, which help strengthen the clarity of our claims regarding topology-dependent security in the one-way QKD protocol. We address each major comment point by point below.

read point-by-point responses

  1. Referee: [Abstract, §3] Abstract and §3 (protocol definition): the central claim that 'security depends exclusively on the underlying Quantum Walk (QW) topology' requires an explicit demonstration that every other element—initial state, coin operator, shift operator, number of steps, measurement bases, and key-sifting rule—remains bitwise identical when the adjacency matrix is switched from cycle to hypercube. No parameter-matching table or pseudocode confirming this isolation is referenced.

    Authors: We appreciate the referee's request for explicit verification. In §3 the protocol is defined such that the initial state (|0⟩ ⊗ |0⟩), coin operator (Hadamard), number of steps, measurement bases, and key-sifting rule are identical for both topologies; the sole difference is the shift operator constructed from the respective adjacency matrix (cycle versus hypercube). To eliminate any ambiguity we will insert a parameter-matching table in the revised §3 that lists every element side-by-side for the two graphs. revision: yes

  2. Referee: [§4] §4 (simulation results): the abstract asserts 'significantly enhanced security and noise resistance' yet supplies no quantitative metrics (e.g., secret-key rate, eavesdropper information, error-rate thresholds, or statistical error bars). Without these numbers and the precise definition of 'identical parameters,' the magnitude of the claimed improvement cannot be evaluated.

    Authors: We agree that quantitative metrics are required to substantiate the performance claims. Section §4 already computes secret-key rates and eavesdropper information under identical parameter sets for both topologies; we will revise the text and figures to report the explicit numerical values, error-rate thresholds, and statistical error bars obtained from repeated simulation runs, together with a concise definition of the shared parameters. revision: yes

  3. Referee: [§4.2] §4.2 (noise models): the noise-resistance comparison must specify whether the same Kraus operators and decoherence rates are applied to both topologies; any difference in effective noise strength would confound attribution to topology alone.

    Authors: The noise models in §4.2 apply identical Kraus operators (depolarizing, amplitude-damping, phase-damping) and the same decoherence rates to both topologies. We will add an explicit sentence in the revised §4.2 confirming that the noise parameters are held constant across the circular and hypercube cases to ensure attribution to topology alone. revision: yes

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged

No circularity; claims rest on open simulation comparisons without self-referential reduction

full rationale

The paper frames its central result as an empirical outcome from Qiskit simulations comparing hypercube and circular QW topologies under identical parameters, with the full framework released as open source. No equations, fitted parameters, or derivations appear that reduce a prediction to its own inputs by construction. The statement that security depends exclusively on topology is presented as the protocol's design premise rather than a derived claim that loops back to self-citation or redefinition. This keeps the work self-contained against external benchmarks.

Axiom & Free-Parameter Ledger

0 free parameters · 0 axioms · 0 invented entities

Abstract-only review supplies no explicit free parameters, axioms, or invented entities; full paper would be needed to audit simulation hyperparameters, noise-model assumptions, or any topology-specific postulates.

pith-pipeline@v0.9.0 · 5535 in / 1022 out tokens · 45795 ms · 2026-05-15T18:51:11.182854+00:00 · methodology

discussion (0)

Sign in with ORCID, Apple, or X to comment. Anyone can read and Pith papers without signing in.

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

59 extracted references · 59 canonical work pages

  1. [1]

    Quantum cryptography: Public key dis- tribution and coin tossing,

    C. H. Bennett and G. Brassard, “Quantum cryptography: Public key dis- tribution and coin tossing,”Theoretical Computer Science, vol. 560, pp. 7–11, 2014, theoretical Aspects of Quantum Cryptography – celebrating 30 years of BB84

    work page 2014

  2. [2]

    Quantum cryptography based on bell’s theorem,

    A. K. Ekert, “Quantum cryptography based on bell’s theorem,”Phys. Rev. Lett., vol. 67, pp. 661–663, Aug 1991

    work page 1991

  3. [3]

    End- to-end demonstration for cubesatellite quantum key distribution,

    P. Zhang, J. Sagar, E. Hastings, M. Stefko, S. Joshi, and J. Rarity, “End- to-end demonstration for cubesatellite quantum key distribution,”IET Quantum Communication, vol. 5, no. 3, pp. 291–302, 2024

    work page 2024

  4. [4]

    Quantum random walks,

    Y . Aharonov, L. Davidovich, and N. Zagury, “Quantum random walks,” Phys. Rev. A, vol. 48, pp. 1687–1690, Aug 1993

    work page 1993

  5. [5]

    Quantum walks with encrypted data,

    P. P. Rohde, J. F. Fitzsimons, and A. Gilchrist, “Quantum walks with encrypted data,”Phys. Rev. Lett., vol. 109, p. 150501, Oct 2012

    work page 2012

  6. [6]

    Quantum key distribution with quantum walks,

    C. Vlachou, W. Krawec, P. Mateus, N. Paunkovi ´c, and A. Souto, “Quantum key distribution with quantum walks,”Quantum Information Processing, vol. 17, no. 11, p. 288, 2018

    work page 2018

  7. [7]

    One-way qkd using quantum walks: security and noise resistance analysis,

    D. Polzoni, “One-way qkd using quantum walks: security and noise resistance analysis,” 2025, accessed: 2025-09-07. [Online]. Available: https://github.com/werefin/1W-QKD-Quantum-Walks

    work page 2025

  8. [8]

    Efficient quantum circuit implementation of quantum walks,

    B. L. Douglas and J. B. Wang, “Efficient quantum circuit implementation of quantum walks,”Phys. Rev. A, vol. 79, p. 052335, May 2009

    work page 2009

  9. [9]

    Random walks: A review of algorithms and applications,

    F. Xia, J. Liu, H. Nie, Y . Fu, L. Wan, and X. Kong, “Random walks: A review of algorithms and applications,”IEEE Transactions on Emerging Topics in Computational Intelligence, vol. 4, no. 2, p. 95–107, Apr. 2020

    work page 2020

  10. [10]

    Quantum walks: a comprehensive review,

    S. E. Venegas Andraca, “Quantum walks: a comprehensive review,” Quantum Information Processing, vol. 11, no. 5, p. 1015–1106, Jul. 2012

    work page 2012

  11. [11]

    Quantum walk computing: Theory, implementation, and application,

    X. Qiang, S. Ma, and H. Song, “Quantum walk computing: Theory, implementation, and application,”Intelligent Computing, vol. 3, p. 0097, 2024

    work page 2024

  12. [12]

    M. A. Nielsen and I. L. Chuang,Quantum Computation and Quantum Information: 10th Anniversary Edition. Cambridge: Cambridge Uni- versity Press, 2010

    work page 2010

  13. [13]

    Portugal,Quantum Walks and Search Algorithms, 2nd ed., ser

    R. Portugal,Quantum Walks and Search Algorithms, 2nd ed., ser. Quantum Science and Technology. Springer Cham, 2018

    work page 2018

  14. [14]

    How to generate and exchange secrets,

    A. C. C. Yao, “How to generate and exchange secrets,” in27th Annual Symposium on Foundations of Computer Science (sfcs 1986), 1986, pp. 162–167

    work page 1986

  15. [15]

    Quantum cryptography without bell’s theorem,

    C. H. Bennett, G. Brassard, and N. D. Mermin, “Quantum cryptography without bell’s theorem,”Phys. Rev. Lett., vol. 68, pp. 557–559, Feb 1992

    work page 1992

  16. [16]

    Unconditional security of quantum key distribution over arbitrarily long distances,

    H. K. Lo and H. F. Chau, “Unconditional security of quantum key distribution over arbitrarily long distances,”Science, vol. 283, no. 5410, pp. 2050–2056, 1999

    work page 2050

  17. [17]

    Entanglement as a precondition for secure quantum key distribution,

    M. Curty, M. Lewenstein, and N. Lütkenhaus, “Entanglement as a precondition for secure quantum key distribution,”Phys. Rev. Lett., vol. 92, p. 217903, May 2004

    work page 2004

  18. [18]

    Detecting two-party quantum correlations in quantum-key-distribution protocols,

    M. Curty, O. Gühne, M. Lewenstein, and N. Lütkenhaus, “Detecting two-party quantum correlations in quantum-key-distribution protocols,” Phys. Rev. A, vol. 71, p. 022306, Feb 2005

    work page 2005

  19. [19]

    Secrecy in prepare-and-measure clauser- horne-shimony-holt tests with a qubit bound,

    E. Woodhead and S. Pironio, “Secrecy in prepare-and-measure clauser- horne-shimony-holt tests with a qubit bound,”Phys. Rev. Lett., vol. 115, p. 150501, Oct 2015

    work page 2015

  20. [20]

    Information-theoretic security proof for quantum-key-distribution protocols,

    R. Renner, N. Gisin, and B. Kraus, “Information-theoretic security proof for quantum-key-distribution protocols,”Physical Review A, vol. 72, no. 1, Jul. 2005

    work page 2005

  21. [21]

    Postselection technique for quantum channels with applications to quantum cryptography,

    M. Christandl, R. König, and R. Renner, “Postselection technique for quantum channels with applications to quantum cryptography,”Phys. Rev. Lett., vol. 102, p. 020504, Jan 2009

    work page 2009

  22. [22]

    Symmetry of large physical systems implies independence of subsystems,

    R. Renner, “Symmetry of large physical systems implies independence of subsystems,”Nature Physics, vol. 3, no. 9, pp. 645–649, Sep 2007

    work page 2007

  23. [23]

    The security of practical quantum key distribution,

    V . Scarani, H. Bechmann-Pasquinucci, N. J. Cerf, M. Dušek, N. Lütken- haus, and M. Peev, “The security of practical quantum key distribution,” Rev. Mod. Phys., vol. 81, pp. 1301–1350, Sep 2009

    work page 2009

  24. [24]

    Tight finite- key analysis for quantum cryptography,

    M. Tomamichel, C. C. W. Lim, N. Gisin, and R. Renner, “Tight finite- key analysis for quantum cryptography,”Nature Communications, vol. 3, no. 1, p. 634, 2012

    work page 2012

  25. [25]

    Distillation of secret key and entanglement from quantum states,

    I. Devetak and A. Winter, “Distillation of secret key and entanglement from quantum states,”Proceedings: Mathematical, Physical and Engineering Sciences, vol. 461, no. 2053, pp. 207–235, 2005. [Online]. Available: http://www.jstor.org/stable/30046924

    work page arXiv 2053

  26. [26]

    The uncertainty principle in the presence of quantum memory,

    M. Berta, M. Christandl, R. Colbeck, J. M. Renes, and R. Renner, “The uncertainty principle in the presence of quantum memory,”Nature Physics, vol. 6, no. 9, pp. 659–662, Sep 2010

    work page 2010

  27. [27]

    Qiskit inverse: IBM quantum documentation,

    Qiskit Development Team, “Qiskit inverse: IBM quantum documentation,” 2025, accessed: 2025-09-08. [Online]. Available: https: //docs.quantum.ibm.com/api/qiskit/qiskit.circuit.Instruction#inverse

    work page 2025

  28. [28]

    Quantum walks on graphs,

    D. Aharonov, A. Ambainis, J. Kempe, and U. Vazirani, “Quantum walks on graphs,” inProceedings of the Thirty-Third Annual ACM Symposium on Theory of Computing, ser. STOC ’01. New York, NY , USA: Association for Computing Machinery, 2001, p. 50–59

    work page 2001

  29. [29]

    AerSimulator: Qiskit aer 0.17.1,

    Qiskit Development Team, “AerSimulator: Qiskit aer 0.17.1,” 2025, accessed: 2025-09-08. [Online]. Available: https://qiskit.github.io/qiskit- aer/stubs/qiskit_aer.AerSimulator.html

    work page 2025

  30. [30]

    Exceptional configurations of quantum walks with grover’s coin,

    N. Nahimovs and A. Rivosh, “Exceptional configurations of quantum walks with grover’s coin,” inMathematical and Engineering Methods in Computer Science, J. Kofro ˇn and T. V ojnar, Eds. Cham: Springer International Publishing, 2016, pp. 79–92

    work page 2016

  31. [31]

    Key distillation from quantum channels using two- way communication protocols,

    J. Bae and A. Acín, “Key distillation from quantum channels using two- way communication protocols,”Phys. Rev. A, vol. 75, p. 012334, Jan 2007

    work page 2007

  32. [32]

    Depolarizing error: Qiskit aer 0.17.1,

    Qiskit Development Team, “Depolarizing error: Qiskit aer 0.17.1,” 2025, accessed: 2025-09-08. [Online]. Available: https://qiskit.github.io/qiskit- aer/stubs/qiskit_aer.noise.depolarizing_error.html

    work page 2025

  33. [33]

    Fighting noise with noise in realistic quantum teleportation,

    R. Fortes and G. Rigolin, “Fighting noise with noise in realistic quantum teleportation,”Phys. Rev. A, vol. 92, p. 012338, Jul 2015

    work page 2015

  34. [34]

    Amplitude damping error: Qiskit aer 0.17.1,

    Qiskit Development Team, “Amplitude damping error: Qiskit aer 0.17.1,” 2025, accessed: 2025-09-08. [Online]. Available: https: //qiskit.github.io/qiskit-aer/stubs/qiskit_aer.noise.amplitude_damping_ error.html

    work page 2025

  35. [35]

    Quantum key distribution over noisy channels by the testing state method,

    H. Shu, C. Y . Zhang, Y . Q. Chen, Z. J. Zheng, and S. M. Fei, “Quantum key distribution over noisy channels by the testing state method,” International Journal of Theoretical Physics, vol. 62, no. 8, Jul. 2023

    work page 2023

  36. [36]

    Hybrid quantum error correction in qubit architectures,

    L. B. Kristensen, M. Kjaergaard, C. K. Andersen, and N. T. Zinner, “Hybrid quantum error correction in qubit architectures,”Phys. Rev. A, vol. 108, p. 022403, Aug 2023

    work page 2023

  37. [37]

    Robustness of entanglement-based discrete and continuous-variable quantum key dis- tribution against channel noise,

    M. Lasota, O. Kovalenko, and V . C. Usenko, “Robustness of entanglement-based discrete and continuous-variable quantum key dis- tribution against channel noise,”New Journal of Physics, vol. 25, no. 12, p. 123003, Dec. 2023

    work page 2023

  38. [38]

    Excitation-damping quantum chan- nels,

    D. Lonigro and D. Chru ´sci´nski, “Excitation-damping quantum chan- nels,”Journal of Physics A: Mathematical and Theoretical, vol. 56, no. 25, p. 255301, May 2023

    work page 2023

  39. [39]

    Noise-adapted qudit codes for amplitude-damping noise,

    S. Dutta, D. Biswas, and P. Mandayam, “Noise-adapted qudit codes for amplitude-damping noise,”Phys. Rev. A, vol. 111, p. 032438, Mar 2025

    work page 2025

  40. [40]

    Phase damping error: Qiskit aer 0.17.1,

    Qiskit Development Team, “Phase damping error: Qiskit aer 0.17.1,” 2025, accessed: 2025-09-08. [Online]. Available: https://qiskit.github. io/qiskit-aer/stubs/qiskit_aer.noise.phase_damping_error.html

    work page 2025

  41. [41]

    Building noise models: Qiskit aer 0.17.1,

    ——, “Building noise models: Qiskit aer 0.17.1,” 2025, accessed: 2025- 09-08. [Online]. Available: https://qiskit.github.io/qiskit-aer/tutorials/3_ building_noise_models.html

    work page 2025

  42. [42]

    Localiza- tion and its consequences for quantum walk algorithms and quantum communication,

    J. P. Keating, N. Linden, J. C. F. Matthews, and A. Winter, “Localiza- tion and its consequences for quantum walk algorithms and quantum communication,”Phys. Rev. A, vol. 76, p. 012315, Jul 2007

    work page 2007

  43. [43]

    Robust quantum state engineering through coherent localization in biased-coin quantum walks,

    H. Majury, J. Boutari, E. O’Sullivan, A. Ferraro, and M. Paternostro, “Robust quantum state engineering through coherent localization in biased-coin quantum walks,”EPJ Quantum Technology, vol. 5, no. 1, p. 1, 2018

    work page 2018

  44. [44]

    Quantum key distribution overcoming practical correlated intensity fluctuations,

    J.-X. Li, F.-Y . Lu, Z.-H. Wang, V . Zapatero, M. Curty, S. Wang, Z.- Q. Yin, W. Chen, D.-Y . He, G.-C. Guo, and Z.-F. Han, “Quantum key distribution overcoming practical correlated intensity fluctuations,”npj Quantum Information, vol. 11, no. 1, p. 106, 2025

    work page 2025

  45. [45]

    Quantum key distribution using optical co- herent states via amplitude damping,

    A. E. Allati and M. E. Baz, “Quantum key distribution using optical co- herent states via amplitude damping,”Optical and Quantum Electronics, vol. 47, no. 5, pp. 1035–1046, 2015

    work page 2015

  46. [46]

    Security aspects of practical quantum cryptography,

    G. Brassard, N. Lütkenhaus, T. Mor, and B. C. Sanders, “Security aspects of practical quantum cryptography,” inAdvances in Cryptology – EUROCRYPT 2000, B. Preneel, Ed. Springer Berlin Heidelberg, 2000, pp. 289–299

    work page 2000

  47. [47]

    Quantum key distribution with high loss: Toward global secure communication,

    W. Y . Hwang, “Quantum key distribution with high loss: Toward global secure communication,”Phys. Rev. Lett., vol. 91, p. 057901, Aug 2003

    work page 2003

  48. [48]

    Large pulse attack as a method of conventional optical eavesdropping in quantum cryptogra- phy,

    A. Vakhitov, V . Makarov, and D. R. Hjelme, “Large pulse attack as a method of conventional optical eavesdropping in quantum cryptogra- phy,”Journal of Modern Optics, vol. 48, no. 13, pp. 2023–2038, 2001

    work page 2023

  49. [49]

    Hacking commercial quantum cryptography systems by tailored bright illumination,

    L. Lydersen, C. Wiechers, C. Wittmann, D. Elser, J. Skaar, and V . Makarov, “Hacking commercial quantum cryptography systems by tailored bright illumination,”Nature Photonics, vol. 4, no. 10, p. 686–689, Aug. 2010

    work page 2010

  50. [50]

    Trojan- horse attacks on quantum-key-distribution systems,

    N. Gisin, S. Fasel, B. Kraus, H. Zbinden, and G. Ribordy, “Trojan- horse attacks on quantum-key-distribution systems,”Physical Review A, vol. 73, no. 2, Feb. 2006

    work page 2006

  51. [51]

    The countermeasures against the blinding attack in quantum key distribution,

    J. Wang, H. Wang, X. Qin, Z. Wei, and Z. Zhang, “The countermeasures against the blinding attack in quantum key distribution,”The European Physical Journal D, vol. 70, no. 1, p. 5, 2016

    work page 2016

  52. [52]

    Quantum hack- ing: Experimental demonstration of time-shift attack against practical quantum-key-distribution systems,

    Y . Zhao, C. H. F. Fung, B. Qi, C. Chen, and H. K. Lo, “Quantum hack- ing: Experimental demonstration of time-shift attack against practical quantum-key-distribution systems,”Phys. Rev. A, vol. 78, p. 042333, Oct 2008

    work page 2008

  53. [53]

    Quantum key distribution using qudits that each encode one bit of raw key,

    H. F. Chau, “Quantum key distribution using qudits that each encode one bit of raw key,”Phys. Rev. A, vol. 92, p. 062324, Dec 2015

    work page 2015

  54. [54]

    Secret-key reconciliation by public discus- sion,

    G. Brassard and L. Salvail, “Secret-key reconciliation by public discus- sion,” inAdvances in Cryptology - EUROCRYPT ’93, T. Helleseth, Ed. Springer Berlin Heidelberg, 1994, pp. 410–423

    work page 1994

  55. [55]

    Sparse- graph codes for information reconciliation in qkd applications,

    F. Mesiti, M. Delgado, M. Mondin, and F. Daneshgaran, “Sparse- graph codes for information reconciliation in qkd applications,” in2010 3rd International Symposium on Applied Sciences in Biomedical and Communication Technologies (ISABEL 2010), 2010, pp. 1–5

    work page 2010

  56. [56]

    Secret key reconcil- iation using bch code in quantum key distribution,

    W. Traisilanun, K. Sripimanwat, and O. Sangaroon, “Secret key reconcil- iation using bch code in quantum key distribution,” in2007 International Symposium on Communications and Information Technologies, 2007, pp. 1482–1485

    work page 2007

  57. [57]

    Privacy amplification by public discussion,

    C. H. Bennett, G. Brassard, and J. M. Robert, “Privacy amplification by public discussion,”SIAM Journal on Computing, vol. 17, no. 2, pp. 210–229, 1988

    work page 1988

  58. [58]

    Lfsr–based hashing and authentication,

    H. Krawczyk, “Lfsr–based hashing and authentication,” inAdvances in Cryptology – CRYPTO ’94, Y . G. Desmedt, Ed. Springer Berlin Heidelberg, 1994, pp. 129–139

    work page 1994

  59. [59]

    Quantum key distribution implemented with d-level time-bin entangled photons,

    H. Yu, S. Sciara, M. Chemnitz, N. Montaut, B. Crockett, B. Fischer, R. Helsten, B. Wetzel, T. A. Goebel, R. G. Krämer, B. E. Little, S. T. Chu, S. Nolte, Z. Wang, J. Azaña, W. J. Munro, D. J. Moss, and R. Morandotti, “Quantum key distribution implemented with d-level time-bin entangled photons,”Nature Communications, vol. 16, no. 1, p. 171, 2025

    work page 2025