Slashdot Mirror
Practical Quantum Cryptography
Alien54 writes: "Saw this on Eureka Alert: A commercially available system for quantum key distribution and cryptography has been released by a spin-off company from the University of Geneva. The system has been tested over distances up to 70km (from Geneva to Lausanne) through standard optical fiber cables and connects to PCs via USB ports. Transmission rates of about 60 bits per seconds were achieved, sufficient for key distribution. You can see the original abstract here, which also has a link for download of the paper in PDF, Postscript, and other formats."
Neato. When we get a "Quantum Crypto IP Backbone" that will be cool.
Of course QC is really only secure when they are direct connections. So if we want to use routers and switches to make connectivity practical we will lose the security.
This type of thing would be cool for businesses and such that want a secure connection with other branches or offices. They could do a token ring style idea where they relay from their own branches to reach a wide area.
Tom
Someday, I'll have a real sig.
Was it a spin-off company, or perhaps just a spin-up or spin-down company?
As nice as this scheme might be compared to previous quantum cryptography schemes, there are still fundamental problemns with implementing quantum cryptography. First off, you need a single, otherwise unused optical fiber to connect the two boxes. This means running your own cable. There's really no way around that. You're not going to find unrepeated, unused fiber just lying around.
vi is my shepard, I shall not font.
The conclusion of the article states that the system is currently commercially available. Here is a link to the QKD System.
-- Find the Truth...
Proof that you don't need to pay 20'000$ a year to study in a University doing advanced research.
I went to University of Geneva, I paid 300$ a semester, poor students(decided by their income) pay 40$ a semester, and this is valid for every department.
Now, if only US Universities could learn from them...
Oh, before the argument comes: no, in Switzerland we don't pay much more taxes than in USA, we pay a bit more, but not that much.
I'm going to go out on a limb here and guess that the result of that equation is the number of times you've been turned down for a date?
--
I Hit the Karma Cap, and All I Got Was This Lousy
I wonder if it's legal to import these things to the united states?
---
Play Six Pack Man. I
I found a site that explains why classic cryptography suffers when compared to the benefits of quantum cryptographic methods.
The site is located at http://www.qubit.org/intros/crypt.html, and is part of the Center for Quantum Computation (Oxford University).
Here's a nice basic overview of QC from the site mentioned above: "While classical cryptography employs various mathematical techniques to restrict eavesdroppers from learning the contents of encrypted messages, in quantum mechanics the information is protected by the laws of physics. In classical cryptography an absolute security of information cannot be guaranteed. The Heisenberg uncertainty principle and quantum entanglement can be exploited in a system of secure communication, often referred to as "quantum cryptography". Quantum cryptography provides means for two parties to exchange a enciphering key over a private channel with complete security of communication."
Linux > Help > About
But once you know the key know how are you sure it is the correct one out of an infinite set of key in an infinite set of universes that exists silmultaneously????
Great. As practical applications of quantum physics become widespread (outside of silicon engineering plants) maybe the mindset shift accompanies it will really take root.
Maybe writers like Frijof Capra, Danah Zohar and even to some extent Roger Penrose will become less hokey in the mainstream view.
You only have to look around the world that is a product of mechanistic thinking - the simplistic cause and effect rationality of Bush's tyrades, the lack of dialectic thinking in politics in general to see that this shift is ripe in the making.
pw:secret
You probably recall how quantum computation works: essentially you shove all the extra computation off into parallel universes and then get the answer back when it comes. Why not expand on that idea and use quantum file storage? The RIAA can create CDs where only part of the audio track exists in our universe and the rest is retrieved from parallel universes by your quantum audio system. This makes file copying mathematically impossible.
Now someone is probably going to pop up and say "well, I can pirate the signal after it has been revirtualized from the quantum foam". I'm glad you brought that up because it leads right into phase two of my idea. In order to listen to music, all consumers would be have sound-decoding chips implanted in their brains. The music would be beamed directly into your head from your audio system.
Thus we see that file copying can be made impossible by those that are willing to pay the price of our freedom. The only solution is to keep quantum computers from becoming a reality
Not nearly secure. Physics protects this communication from straight interception. However, it does not protect it from interception and then retransmission. But cool buzzwords. They'll make a little bit of cash before the con is up.
put that one in the NSA's pipe and smoke it.
Great...all my encryption problems are solved!!! And not a moment too soon, either...
:-)
After all, I was getting a bit nervous with respect to my encryption needs in light of the retirement of further development of PGP and the possible inadequacies of GnuPG...
Beer is proof that God loves us and wants us to be happy. -- Benjamin Franklin
Well, I wasn't too sure, so I dug up some links to try and help myself and others understand this:m /quantum-index.html
http://research.microsoft.com/~gottesma/QKD.html
http://www.qubit.org/intros/crypt.html
http://www.ecst.csuchico.edu/~atman/Crypto/quantu
The last link is particularly +1 insightful about the basics of quantum cryptography.
I posted to
Home Page here:
www.idquantique.com/index.html
"It is a greater offense to steal men's labor, than their clothes"
Now someone is probably going to pop up and say "well, I can pirate the signal after it has been revirtualized from the quantum foam". I'm glad you brought that up because it leads right into phase two of my idea. In order to listen to music, all consumers would be have sound-decoding chips implanted in their brains. The music would be beamed directly into your head from your audio system.
Are those spelling mistakes OCR typos or a secret embedded message? Oh well, noticed it now, I guess the gig is up.
It only comes in three colors.
What makes the transfer secure is that the two parties involved don't reveal their polarizer settings until AFTER the bits have been transferred. By which time, it's too late for the "man in the middle" to go back and change his answers.
It's really quite clever...
-Mark
if anyone wants to read more look for this book which covers the history of cryptography from ancient egypt to quantum cryptography...i read it, and it was extremely interesting from a mathematical and computer point of view...it includes a whole section of the theories behind quantum computing and quantum cryptography...
"Facts are meaningless. You could use facts to prove anything that's even remotely true." - Homer Simpson
And I just bought a newtonian key distribution system! The vendor told me quantum mechanics was nonsense.
... "Give me a woman who loves beer and I will conquer the w
But how do you know who the recipient is? QC offers no authentication. If you have to use public key for authentication, what advantage is gained by using superior methods for confidentiality?
The only one I can think of is that, with conventional cryptography, you can capture the data stream and crack it "off-line". I suppose that this is significant: with QC you only have to worry about whether they've cracked your private key (that you will use for authentication) already, not whether they can in 100 years (because you've used it for encryption).
Another argument might be that it is easier to eavesdrop on a channel than to redirect it. But that seems like a dubious assumption, if the enemy is determined.
Thoughts?
The evaluation of an action as 'practical' . . . depends on what it is that one wishes to practice.
First rule of quantum mechanics: just because it's been done, doesn't mean it can be done.
That's not a lot of data. How can it be practical? As proof of concept, it's great, but to actually use quantum crypto for one-time pads you need to be able to transmit as much key information as you have data. That requires great speed, as much as you would expect to be able to transmit your encrypted data itself. You could use 60 bits/second for secure exchange of conventional keys, but there are already very safe ways of doing that. Using quantum crypto for that is a total waste because the added benefit of the QC is nullified by the fact that you're using it to exchange non-one-time-pad, and hence crackable, keys.
A while back there was all these studies and experiments about duplicating light beams. I recall mentions of quantum entanglment and such (stuff that's used in these secure quantum transmision schemes).
Could one of these duplication beams be used w/out being detected? I know normal reception and retransmission IS detectable.
its impractical. other than two interconnected static locations transferring secrets its impractical in its current form.
"this is useless you linux fags!" They have linux on packets of cig's now?
"Have you ever thought about just turning off the TV, sitting down with your kids, and hitting them?"
However, like many of their announcements, they couldn't place a time or date when it would be released...
IANAL, but I've seen actors play them on TV
Just two comments:
Fair to who? Fair is one of those subjective words that people who are trying to justify an otherwise irrational argument love to use. In fact, all definitions of "fair" pertaining to your use of it lead to additional philosophical (and subjective) arguments. Specifically, "Being in accordance with relative merit or significance" and "Consistent with rules, logic, or ethics." Whose rules? Whose logic? Whose ethics? Don't try to tell me "Society" because that's a cop-out - I'm part of the society and these aren't my ethics.
No, the "rich" aren't being asked to give more, they're being forced to give more and that is the fundamental difference in opinion here. There is no recourse, there is no appeal, and if they don't surrender the money, they'll be sued, injunctioned, siezed, and attached into poverty. There is only a matter of degree between this kind of taxation and being mugged. In both cases, the person with money is being told, "give up your money or else."
I have no problem with reasonable taxes for suitable government, just as I have no problem with helping those who are in true need of assistance, but the whole "you made more money than me, so you must be exploiting me, so you owe me money" argument is ludicrous.
If you can afford to pay more money and want to give it to "progressive, social causes" then be my guest. I applaud you for it. But don't force me to do it and then call it "fair." It isn't.
Second plank of the communist manifesto: "A heavy progressive or graduated income tax"
Schroedinger's cat may have sacrificed its life to make this product a reality. Or maybe not. Only Heisenberg knows for sure.
Nuff said? I think so.
The whole benefit is the un-eavesdroppable exchange of OTPs. And yes, OTPs MUST equal the length of the message to be transmitted. Doh.
Man, you made my day. This may lead some to wonder how boring my day is. It's pretty boring.
"RIAA can create CDs where only part of the audio track exists in our universe..."
I would bet this appeals a lot to RIAA. But why stop there? From what I understand they're looking for a way to sell you the CD so that there's actually no music on it.
Perhaps just a recording of one of the executives in charge saying "Thank you for purchasing this digital music container device. We assume that you have a computer and have downloaded countless megabytes of our copyrighted material. Therefore, we have pre-removed the equivalent amount of data from this CD. Enjoy." Followed by 71 and 3/4 minutes of silence.
Sweat
It breaks my pluginses, my precious!
You seem to be somewhat ignorant of the basic fundamentals of quantum cryptography. Why not take a moment to go peek at some of the articles linked to throughout the postings here, and check back in when you are enlightened.
It's a viable (though rather clunky so far) solution for unbreakable crypto. Get over it.
Thank you.
yeah, I know a guy that got fired from his job at Boeing for proving that his anti-gravity system worked. Boeing wanted non of it, told him that 'This company obeys the laws of physics'.
Can you direct us to a page with his proof on it? From what I've seen if Eve is trying to listen, then both ends know about it and can send a bouncer type to go kick Eve's ass off the line...If your friend can provide an example of how QC can be broken then I think all of slashdot would like to hear it. (the rest of the world is unimportant)
If Mr. Edison had thought smarter he wouldn't sweat as much. --Nikola Tesla
yea, don't bother attacking the idea when you can attack the grammar huh? ROFLMAO!!!
F4RVVMI0-4MV4K3-GNJWRLNVUWILSNVH47 TP9MTJ894PW3MJSK4L;M49TIMAJK TMVAKL;TMAW4K950[MAWVK9T[MK9PUD56MO/8NK 4SW-90A-94 8I3E-90 9Y5-4]Y59S,BOKSY;'5GB L; YL;SE,L YR;E'KAO P34[I693 A[90[ ZGFKGL;/ ,GL;D'F KGLSDF;'G DSFG,DFLG;D L; C3D1JKCN00892N5VFKLMD31NOV VTN5UIONT
And that completes our tour of Hilbert Space. Any questions?
Oh for crying out loud! Who let that cat in here? Now I don't even know what i said. That's one dead cat if I ever get my hands on it.
intellectual property law is philosophically incoherent. it is your moral duty to ignore it or sabotage it
Hmmm, your encrypted data does not look statistically random to me :-) Try this instead ...
y 3K KqtXZb3ljA/oM98PLKjfAhfRqbo1JqO4UUYUu25djiS7Ove45l pmoaSycP8T+usdqcJFtNwUrTelCNEUe9dJPbXGuGgR7JjzA9Xx 6dzu76z3XH/rf51Tx1iM8bI7EcT1ijfWt8s59J/JZpHbxJ1Vxa PHYchy
qANQR1DBwE4DmBod8oWMnB5+t0opVD15zJPHNvLYF1MxaUO
xkcd is not in the sudoers file. This incident will be reported.
It's not random. The letter patterns are close together on a keyboard, for which you can deduce that it's just a crapflood.
Well that's pretty fast for the swiss...
using satellites orbiting the earth. you can authenticate the satellite by determining its altitude. if your connection is interrupted and then rejoined by a "man in the middle" then you will recognize that they are at a lower altitude than your authentic satellite.
If I may cut and paste a bit o' text:
"Los Alamos quantum cryptography uses photons randomly polarized to states representing ones and zeroes. Polarization refers to the direction of oscillation for the electromagnetic wave of a photon. These polarized photons are transmitted between sender and receiver to create a random string of numbers known only to the sender and receiver. This string of numbers becomes a quantum cryptographic key that locks or unlocks the encrypted messages that are sent via normal communication channels. Because the photons cannot be intercepted without tipping off the receiver, the quantum cryptographic key is secure and the data is secure."
So, what is the crux of the security... "Photons cannot be intercepted without tipping off the receiver..."
Really? So man in the middle cannot happen; let's just accept that on blind faith, and quantum cryptography will work. Now, never really believing in blind faith, lets think about how we can be man in the middle without tipping off the receiver, or how about who cares if we do. Don't think about the theory; its not as important as the application.
I drop fibre between A and B for key generation. I turn the magic switch and let the no key sync take place. WTH I just noticed my data is bad. A and B reset. How do I know I am still directly communicating? I jump through a bunch of hoops to make sure my twin is who I think it is and not some doppleganger... now the security is in your authentication/restart procedure, not the theory.
/\/\icro/\/\uncher
mod this up as funny even if you don't know why. lmao!
Redirection isn't a problem either; to redirect the stream you'd have to observe it, and by observing it you will change it, and make it impossible to view the messages.
I guess you could always kill the recipient and read his messages, but any form of cryptography short of biometric (and others have pointed out the flaws in that) will be vulnerable to that attack.
I couldn't get the idea, owing to the grammar. Pardon while I explain myself: please explain yourself, this time using coherent sentences and correctly spelled words.
As an exercise, try stating the problem and your thesis to yourself before beginning to make your case. This way, you can have a clear idea of what you wish to express. Try explaining your viewpoint to yourself, aloud, paying careful attention to the clarity and coherence of your language.
Using techniques like this, it's possible to build up the ability to make arguments that are not merely accurate refelections of well reasoned opinions on your part, but that are easy to explain to others.
It might help you make enough money to pay for that little bastard of yours.
That's a good comment. Concise, correctly spelled, and generally effective.
I'm gonna skullfuck your mother.
Because I found your comment amusing. The only problem with the 71 and 3/4 minutes of silence is that before long people will clamouring for those CDS. What is preferable, N'sync or 72 mins of silence?
I mean interception, not man-in-the-middle. I cut your fiber and read your photons, without trying to pass them on to the intended recipient. Then, when you try to contact the recipient over some "conventional" channel for phase two (comparing the polarities on the two ends), I intercept that, and we discuss the polarities I intercepted. You require that my messages be signed by the intended recipient, of course, but I've broken RSA, so no problem. Then, you send the message xor'ed with the random bits, and I intercept that. I've stolen the message, and you're none the wiser.
The evaluation of an action as 'practical' . . . depends on what it is that one wishes to practice.
Here is an article in Information Security magazine explaining how quantum cryptography works and why it is significant:
1 /f eatures_crypto.shtml
http://www.infosecuritymag.com/articles/august0
"Don't touch anything."
The Law of Falling Bodies
pay attention fucking retard
just because you don't mind a stupid tax system does not make it right
you self centered marxists are the most annoying fucks in the universe
everybody else can follow along, why can't you?
i understand all of these other people just fine, it is the idiots like you and October boy, that pick on typos and add other ignorant destractors that have not one blessed thing to do with the discussion, that are just wasting electrons
do you even bother to think critically about this shit they fed you in havana or harvard?