pith. sign in

arxiv: 2606.23392 · v1 · pith:GTXXACQTnew · submitted 2026-06-22 · 🪐 quant-ph

On the cryptographic potential of single-qubit rotations

Alex B. Grilo , Lucas Hanouz , Anne Marin This is my paper

Pith reviewed 2026-06-26 07:51 UTC · model grok-4.3

classification 🪐 quant-ph
keywords quantum cryptographysingle-qubit rotationscomposable securityqubit preparationqubit measurementQline architecture
0
0 comments X

The pith

Trusted single-qubit rotations allow delegation of qubit preparation and measurement to untrusted providers in most quantum cryptographic protocols.

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

The paper presents two composably secure constructions. One implements single-qubit measurement in a way that works in any context. The other implements qubit preparation under assumptions that hold for the vast majority of common protocols. Together they show that a trusted single-qubit rotation device can replace the need for trusted qubit sources or detectors. This reduces hardware trust requirements while preserving security.

Core claim

Two composably secure constructions show that in most quantum cryptographic protocols, parties traditionally required to perform trusted qubit preparation or measurement can delegate these tasks to an untrusted provider and instead rely on a trusted single-qubit rotation device, with the measurement construction being universally applicable and the preparation construction relying on assumptions satisfied by the vast majority of common protocols.

What carries the argument

The two composably secure constructions that replace trusted qubit operations with single-qubit rotations.

If this is right

  • Single-qubit measurement can be delegated universally across protocols.
  • Qubit preparation delegation applies to the vast majority of common quantum cryptographic protocols.
  • The Qline architecture supports a wide range of single-qubit protocols.

Where Pith is reading between the lines

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

  • Quantum network hardware requirements could shift toward simpler rotation devices.
  • Protocol designers might prioritize designs compatible with rotation-only trusted components.

Load-bearing premise

The specific assumptions regarding the underlying protocol for the qubit preparation construction are inherently satisfied by the vast majority of common quantum cryptographic protocols.

What would settle it

A concrete counterexample protocol that violates the assumptions needed for the qubit preparation construction would disprove the claim of applicability to most common protocols.

Figures

Figures reproduced from arXiv: 2606.23392 by Alex B. Grilo, Anne Marin, Lucas Hanouz.

Figure 1
Figure 1. Figure 1: The state distribution systems of Charlie (left) and Bob (right) [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p005_1.png] view at source ↗
Figure 2
Figure 2. Figure 2: The system SIM plugged on SDB. In order to prove the desired result SDC ≈0 SDB ◦ SIM (i.e., Theorem 1 below), which states the security of Charlie’s protocol SDC , we first show the following Lemma 1 which focuses on the single-qubit subsystems composing SDC and SDB ◦ SIM, namely SDC n , SDB n , and SIMn. Lemma 1. Under Assumption 1, for all n ∈ [N] SDC n ≈0 SDB n ◦ SIMn. (6) 6 [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/fu… view at source ↗
Figure 3
Figure 3. Figure 3: The distinguisher D and the system S, either equal to SDC n or SDB n ◦ SIMn. Without loss of generality, we can consider that the behavior of D amounts to: 1. Choosing an angle θn and preparing a pure state |τ ⟩ in a single-qubit register A, and a private register D1. 2. Sending θn and register A to S (through the input ρin of S) for it to apply its operation, and getting the register back (from the output… view at source ↗
Figure 4
Figure 4. Figure 4: Charlie’s state distribution SDC source and its variant SDCNOT . In order to prove Theorem 2, we first show that the state distribution SDC source of Charlie securely implements SDCNOT . Lemma 2. SDC source ≈0 SDCNOT . (10) Proof. As for the proof of Lemma 1, this proof is inspired by [GHM25]. First notice that from the way SDC source and SDCNOT sample their angles and treat separate rounds n ∈ [N], we can… view at source ↗
read the original abstract

In the domain of quantum communication, cryptographic protocols often require users to have access to trusted qubit sources or detectors. Recently, it was shown that on an architecture called the Qline, several protocols can equivalently be performed by parties capable only of single-qubit rotations. In this work, we introduce two composably secure constructions that together show how in most quantum cryptographic protocols, parties traditionally required to perform trusted qubit preparation or measurement can delegate these tasks to an untrusted provider and instead rely on a trusted single-qubit rotation device. Our first construction implements single-qubit measurement and is universally applicable across any context. In contrast, our second construction, which addresses qubit preparation, relies on specific assumptions regarding the underlying protocol. We show, however, that these assumptions are inherently satisfied by the vast majority of common quantum cryptographic protocols. A notable consequence of our results is the formal validation of the Qline as a versatile architecture capable of supporting a wide range of single-qubit protocols.

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

1 major / 0 minor

Summary. The paper introduces two composably secure constructions showing that in most quantum cryptographic protocols, parties can delegate trusted qubit preparation or measurement to an untrusted provider and instead use a trusted single-qubit rotation device. The measurement construction is claimed to be universally applicable; the preparation construction relies on protocol-specific assumptions asserted to hold for the vast majority of common protocols. A consequence is formal validation of the Qline architecture for single-qubit protocols.

Significance. If the composable security proofs are complete and the generality argument for the preparation construction is substantiated with an explicit list of assumptions plus a non-case-by-case justification, the work would meaningfully reduce trusted hardware requirements in quantum cryptography. The emphasis on composable security is a strength, as it supports modular use in larger protocols.

major comments (1)
  1. [Abstract] Abstract (and the corresponding section detailing the preparation construction): the central claim that the constructions apply to 'most quantum cryptographic protocols' rests on the assertion that the preparation construction's assumptions 'are inherently satisfied by the vast majority of common quantum cryptographic protocols.' No explicit enumeration of those assumptions appears, nor is a general argument provided that they hold for typical prepare-and-measure or entanglement-based protocols (as opposed to case-by-case verification). This directly limits the scope of the 'most protocols' claim.

Simulated Author's Rebuttal

1 responses · 0 unresolved

We thank the referee for their detailed review and constructive feedback. We address the major comment below.

read point-by-point responses

  1. Referee: [Abstract] Abstract (and the corresponding section detailing the preparation construction): the central claim that the constructions apply to 'most quantum cryptographic protocols' rests on the assertion that the preparation construction's assumptions 'are inherently satisfied by the vast majority of common quantum cryptographic protocols.' No explicit enumeration of those assumptions appears, nor is a general argument provided that they hold for typical prepare-and-measure or entanglement-based protocols (as opposed to case-by-case verification). This directly limits the scope of the 'most protocols' claim.

    Authors: We agree that the current presentation would benefit from greater explicitness. The manuscript asserts that the assumptions are inherently satisfied by the vast majority of protocols and claims to show this, but does not provide a standalone enumeration or a non-case-by-case general argument. In the revised version we will add a dedicated subsection that (i) explicitly lists the assumptions required by the preparation construction and (ii) supplies a general structural argument, based on the typical form of prepare-and-measure and entanglement-based protocols, explaining why those assumptions hold in the common case. This revision will directly address the scope limitation noted by the referee. revision: yes

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged

No circularity; constructions are self-contained

full rationale

The paper presents two new composably secure constructions for delegating qubit preparation and measurement tasks. The provided abstract and context contain no self-definitional reductions, fitted inputs renamed as predictions, load-bearing self-citations, or other enumerated circular patterns. The generality claim regarding protocol assumptions is stated as a shown result without reducing to a tautology or prior self-referential input by construction. The derivation chain relies on standard composable security frameworks and appears independent of its own outputs.

Axiom & Free-Parameter Ledger

0 free parameters · 0 axioms · 0 invented entities

No details on parameters, axioms or entities available from the abstract alone.

pith-pipeline@v0.9.1-grok · 5692 in / 862 out tokens · 28712 ms · 2026-06-26T07:51:22.844582+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 · 15 canonical work pages

  1. [1]

    doi:10.1007/0-387-34805-0_13 , author=

    Bit Commitment Using Pseudo-Randomness , booktitle=. doi:10.1007/0-387-34805-0_13 , author=

    work page doi:10.1007/0-387-34805-0_13

  2. [2]

    2000 , publisher=

    Quantum Computation and Quantum Information , author=. 2000 , publisher=

    2000

  3. [3]

    Chaum , title =

    The Dining Cryptographers Problem: Unconditional Sender and Recipient Untraceability , journal=. doi:10.1007/BF00206326 , author=

    work page doi:10.1007/bf00206326

  4. [4]

    International Conference on the Theory and Application of Cryptology and Information Security , year=

    Information-theoretic security without an honest majority , author=. International Conference on the Theory and Application of Cryptology and Information Security , year=

  5. [5]

    Journal of Cryptology , volume=

    Protocols for multiparty coin toss with a dishonest majority , author=. Journal of Cryptology , volume=. 2015 , publisher=

    2015

  6. [6]

    Inoue and T

    K. Inoue and T. Ohashi and T. Kukita and K. Watanabe and S. Hayashi and T. Honjo and H. Takesue , journal =. Differential-phase-shift quantum secret sharing , volume =. 2008 , url =. doi:10.1364/OE.16.015469 , abstract =

    work page doi:10.1364/oe.16.015469 2008

  7. [8]

    Using Cascade in quantum key distribution , author =. Phys. Rev. Appl. , volume =. 2023 , month =. doi:10.1103/PhysRevApplied.20.064040 , url =

    work page doi:10.1103/physrevapplied.20.064040 2023

  8. [9]

    Paterson , booktitle =

    Benjamin Dowling and Torben Brandt Hansen and Kenneth G. Paterson , booktitle =. Many a Mickle Makes a Muckle: A Framework for Provably Quantum-Secure Hybrid Key Exchange , volume =

  9. [10]

    Nielsen and Isaac L

    Michael A. Nielsen and Isaac L. Chuang , date-added =. Quantum Computation and Quantum Information , year =

  10. [11]

    Small Accessible Quantum Information Does Not Imply Security , volume =

    Robert K. Small Accessible Quantum Information Does Not Imply Security , volume =. Phys. Rev. Lett. , number =

  11. [12]

    Leftover Hashing Against Quantum Side Information , volume=

    Tomamichel, Marco and Schaffner, Christian and Smith, Adam and Renner, Renato , year=. Leftover Hashing Against Quantum Side Information , volume=. IEEE Transactions on Information Theory , publisher=. doi:10.1109/tit.2011.2158473 , number=

    work page doi:10.1109/tit.2011.2158473 2011

  12. [13]

    Establishing Shared Secret Keys on Quantum Line Networks: Protocol and Security , year=

    Doosti, Mina and Hanouz, Lucas and Marin, Anne and Kashefi, Elham and Kaplan, Marc , booktitle=. Establishing Shared Secret Keys on Quantum Line Networks: Protocol and Security , year=

  13. [14]

    R. J. Serfling , title =. The Annals of Statistics , number =. 1974 , doi =

    1974

  14. [15]

    2011 , eprint=

    Information Reconciliation for Quantum Key Distribution , author=. 2011 , eprint=

    2011

  15. [16]

    International Conference on the Theory and Application of Cryptographic Techniques , year=

    Secret-Key Reconciliation by Public Discussion , author=. International Conference on the Theory and Application of Cryptographic Techniques , year=

  16. [17]

    Simon J. D. Phoenix and Stephen M. Barnett and Paul D. Townsend and K. J. Blow , date-added =. Multi-user Quantum Cryptography on Optical Networks , volume =. Journal of Modern Optics , number =

  17. [18]

    Nature Communications , volume=

    Multi-client distributed blind quantum computation with the Qline architecture , author=. Nature Communications , volume=. 2023 , publisher=

    2023

  18. [19]

    How to share a secret , volume =

    Adi Shamir , date-added =. How to share a secret , volume =. Communications of the ACM , number =

  19. [20]

    1979 International Workshop on Managing Requirements Knowledge (MARK) , year=

    Safeguarding cryptographic keys , author=. 1979 International Workshop on Managing Requirements Knowledge (MARK) , year=

    1979

  20. [21]

    Multi-party d-Level Quantum Secret Sharing Scheme , volume =

    Heling Xiao and Jingliang Gao , date-added =. Multi-party d-Level Quantum Secret Sharing Scheme , volume =. International Journal of Theoretical Physics , pages =

  21. [22]

    Quantum secret sharing with continuous-variable cluster states , volume =

    Hoi-Kwan Lau and Christian Weedbrook , date-added =. Quantum secret sharing with continuous-variable cluster states , volume =. Phys. Rev. A , number =

  22. [23]

    Cleve and D

    R. Cleve and D. Gottesman and H.-K. Lo , date-added =. How to share a quantum secret , volume =. Phys. Rev. Lett. , number =

  23. [24]

    Walmsley and Elham Kashefi and Stefanie Barz , date-added =

    Marco Clementi and Anna Pappa and Andreas Eckstein and Ian A. Walmsley and Elham Kashefi and Stefanie Barz , date-added =. Classical multiparty computation using quantum resources , volume =. Phys. Rev. A , number =

  24. [25]

    Two-Party secret key distribution via a modified quantum secret sharing protocol , volume =

    W P Grice and P G Evans and B Lawrie and M Legr. Two-Party secret key distribution via a modified quantum secret sharing protocol , volume =. Opt Express , number =

  25. [26]

    Differential-phase-shift quantum secret sharing , volume =

    Zhao-Ying Jia and Jie Gu and Bing-Hong Li and Hua-Lei Yin and Zeng-Bing Chen , date-added =. Differential-phase-shift quantum secret sharing , volume =. Entropy , number =

  26. [27]

    Single Qubit Quantum Secret Sharing , volume =

    Christian Schmid and Pavel Trojek and Harald Weinfurter and Mohamed Bourennane and Marek Zukowski and Christian Kurtsiefer , date-added =. Single Qubit Quantum Secret Sharing , volume =. Phys. Rev. Lett. , number =

  27. [28]

    Unconditional security of etanglement-based continuous variable quantum secret sharing , volume =

    Ioannis Kogias and Yu Xiang and Qiongyi He and and Gerardo Adesso , date-added =. Unconditional security of etanglement-based continuous variable quantum secret sharing , volume =. Phys. Rev. A , number =

  28. [29]

    Quantum secret sharing , volume =

    Mark Hillery and Vladim. Quantum secret sharing , volume =. Phys. Rev. A , number =

  29. [30]

    Sharing classical secrets with continuous-variable entanglement: Composable security and network coding advantage , volume =

    Nathan Walk and Jens Eisert , date-added =. Sharing classical secrets with continuous-variable entanglement: Composable security and network coding advantage , volume =. PRX Quantum , number =

  30. [31]

    Abstract Cryptography , year =

    Ueli Maurer and Renato Renner , booktitle =. Abstract Cryptography , year =

  31. [32]

    Cryptographic security of quantum key distribution , year =

    Christopher Portmann and Renato Renner , date-added =. Cryptographic security of quantum key distribution , year =

  32. [33]

    A largely self-contained and complete security proof for quantum key distribution , volume=

    Tomamichel, Marco and Leverrier, Anthony , year=. A largely self-contained and complete security proof for quantum key distribution , volume=. doi:10.22331/q-2017-07-14-14 , journal=

    work page doi:10.22331/q-2017-07-14-14 2017

  33. [34]

    Quantumcryptography:Publickeydistribution andcointossing,

    Quantum cryptography: Public key distribution and coin tossing , journal =. 2014 , issn =. doi:https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tcs.2014.05.025 , url =

    work page doi:10.1016/j.tcs.2014.05.025 2014

  34. [35]

    Annual Cryptology Conference , year=

    Sampling in a quantum population, and applications , author=. Annual Cryptology Conference , year=

  35. [36]

    J. L. Carter and M. N. Wegman , journal =. Universal classes of hash functions , year =

  36. [37]

    Marc Kaplan and Georg Harder , title =

  37. [38]

    doi:10.1007/978-3-540-78440-1_11 , author=

    Efficient Simultaneous Broadcast , booktitle=. doi:10.1007/978-3-540-78440-1_11 , author=

    work page doi:10.1007/978-3-540-78440-1_11

  38. [39]

    doi:10.1007/978-3-642-17373-8_16 , author=

    Efficient String-Commitment from Weak Bit-Commitment , booktitle=. doi:10.1007/978-3-642-17373-8_16 , author=

    work page doi:10.1007/978-3-642-17373-8_16

  39. [40]

    doi:10.1007/BF00196774 , author=

    Bit Commitment Using Pseudorandomness , journal=. doi:10.1007/BF00196774 , author=

    work page doi:10.1007/bf00196774

  40. [41]

    2006 , url =

    Iftach Haitner and Omer Reingold , title =. 2006 , url =

    2006

  41. [42]

    2017 , doi =

    Melissa Chase and David Derler and Steven Goldfeder and Claudio Orlandi and Sebastian Ramacher and Christian Rechberger and Daniel Slamanig and Greg Zaverucha , title =. 2017 , doi =

    2017

  42. [43]

    , title =

    Rompel, J. , title =. 1990 , isbn =. doi:10.1145/100216.100269 , booktitle =

    work page doi:10.1145/100216.100269 1990

  43. [44]

    Journal of computer and system sciences , volume=

    New hash functions and their use in authentication and set equality , author=. Journal of computer and system sciences , volume=. 1981 , publisher=

    1981

  44. [45]

    , journal=

    Gennaro, R. , journal=. A protocol to achieve independence in constant rounds , year=

  45. [46]

    2024 , eprint=

    Quantum One-Wayness of the Single-Round Sponge with Invertible Permutations , author=. 2024 , eprint=

    2024

  46. [47]

    ArXiv , year=

    Cryptographic security of quantum key distribution , author=. ArXiv , year=

  47. [48]

    Nature , volume=

    Experimental relativistic zero-knowledge proofs , author=. Nature , volume=. 2021 , publisher=

    2021

  48. [49]

    Bernstein and others , year =

    Daniel J. Bernstein and others , year =. SPHINCS: Practical stateless hash-based signatures , volume =. Eurocrypt 2015 , doi =

    2015

  49. [50]

    , booktitle =

    Hoffstein, Jeffrey and Pipher, Jill and Silverman, Joseph H. , booktitle =

  50. [51]

    2025 , journal=

    Security of a secret sharing protocol on the Qline , author=. 2025 , journal=. 2504.19702 , archivePrefix=

    arXiv 2025

  51. [52]

    Deploying the Qline System for a QKD Metropolitan Network on the Berlin OpenQKD Testbed , year=

    Sena, Matheus and Harder, Georg and Döring, Ronny and Braun, Ralf-Peter and Ritter, Michaela and Holschke, Oliver and Kaplan, Marc and Geitz, Marc , journal=. Deploying the Qline System for a QKD Metropolitan Network on the Berlin OpenQKD Testbed , year=

  52. [53]

    Experimental Single Qubit Quantum Secret Sharing , volume=

    Schmid, Christian and Trojek, Pavel and Bourennane, Mohamed and Kurtsiefer, Christian and Żukowski, Marek and Weinfurter, Harald , year=. Experimental Single Qubit Quantum Secret Sharing , volume=. Physical Review Letters , publisher=. doi:10.1103/physrevlett.95.230505 , number=

    work page doi:10.1103/physrevlett.95.230505

  53. [54]

    Practical Quantum Oblivious Transfer

    Bennett, Charles and Brassard, Gilles and Crépeau, Claude and Skubiszewska, Marie-Hélène , year =. Practical Quantum Oblivious Transfer. , volume =

  54. [55]

    QEnclave - A practical solution for secure quantum cloud computing , volume=

    Ma, Yao and Kashefi, Elham and Arapinis, Myrto and Chakraborty, Kaushik and Kaplan, Marc , year=. QEnclave - A practical solution for secure quantum cloud computing , volume=. npj Quantum Information , publisher=. doi:10.1038/s41534-022-00612-5 , number=

    work page doi:10.1038/s41534-022-00612-5

  55. [56]

    2024 , eprint=

    Verification of Quantum Computations without Trusted Preparations or Measurements , author=. 2024 , eprint=

    2024

  56. [57]

    Cryptography in the Bounded-Quantum-Storage Model , journal =

    Damg. Cryptography in the Bounded-Quantum-Storage Model , journal =. 2008 , doi =

    2008

  57. [58]

    Cryptography from Noisy Storage , author =. Phys. Rev. Lett. , volume =. 2008 , month =. doi:10.1103/PhysRevLett.100.220502 , url =

    work page doi:10.1103/physrevlett.100.220502 2008

  58. [59]

    Unconditional Security From Noisy Quantum Storage , volume=

    Konig, Robert and Wehner, Stephanie and Wullschleger, Jürg , year=. Unconditional Security From Noisy Quantum Storage , volume=. IEEE Transactions on Information Theory , publisher=. doi:10.1109/tit.2011.2177772 , number=

    work page doi:10.1109/tit.2011.2177772 2011

  59. [60]

    2024 , eprint=

    The Round Complexity of Proofs in the Bounded Quantum Storage Model , author=. 2024 , eprint=

    2024