Slashdot Mirror
BBN Announces Functional Quantum Encrypted Network
anzha writes "BBN Technologies has announced that under DARPA's Quantum Network Project to have built in conjunction with Harvard University the world's first functional quantum encrypted network. This is probably funded under DARPA's Quantum Information Science and Technology Program."
...one of the DARPA IXO programs, Cougaar, has developed a fair number of message transport techniques over the last few years. Good times.
The Army reading list
I know the theory is that quantum encryption is totally secure, as observing the data in transit actually changes it.
Can someone please explain how on earth this works?
Honey, I shrunk the Cygwin
...pairs at some point during the transmission (for instance when pumping the signal strength over distance)? Observing the entangled photon(s) would not change the originals...
Loading...
I have been reading (snippets) about this subject for... well just as long as /. has been covering it.
But I understand that the tapping of this data means that the information is lost .
Isn't this the perfect dos attack ?
( just thought I'd plant a silly question )
-- forget
Aren't at least some of the widely used security algorithms proven to be likewise unbreakable without changing the laws of, mmmm, mathematics?
In Soviet Washington the swamp drains you.
If they are using entagled photons it seems they can't ever use a repeater or amplify the signal. How do they get this to cover any reasonable distance...or do they just send a whole bunch of photons knowing some will get lost...if so I wonder how low the bit rate is.
If you liked this thought maybe you would find my blog nice too:
...and more about intrusion detection? So you now *know* when your data is being snooped. 'Scuse my naivete, but isn't that a bit late?
Just because you know someone hasn't intercepted your message doesn't mean the person you -sent- it to wasn't undercover.
It is more productive to voice thoughtful opinions (reply) than to judge (moderate) others.
Patent-pending BBN protocols pave the way for robust quantum networks on a larger scale by providing "any to any" networking of quantum cryptography through a mesh of passive optical switches and cryptographic key relays. Well, well... in previous posts, Assmasher and logicnazi noted the problem with repeaters and routers. It sounds like they are using passive switches, that is, purely optical switching (lenses, say) rather than "optical to electrical, do the switching, and back to optical". When that fails, they use a "cryptographic key relay" (I haven't found out what one of those is yet, but I'm guessing that it's a tamper-resistant harware gizmo that supposedly can handle cryptographic material securely).
Well, this is neat, but it's going to be a lot harder to build a network this way. Optical routers (purely optical, no converting to electrical) are pretty expensive. And every place you can't use an optical router or you need a repeater, you also need a cryptographic key relay.
And after all that, it's still going to be easier to compromise an endpoint or a cryptographic key relay, or to use ARP poisoning to set up a man-in-the-middle attack (what good is all that spiffy quantum crypto if the router routes it to the wrong recipient?)
It's amazing how low the information content is in this - especially considering how much some people are getting whipped up and making sweeping generalizations.
How many qbits? What kind of bandwidth? All optical point to point or switched? Transmission distance? What materials are being used for transport?
I'd love to know how many qbits they're playing with here to at least have a minor clue as to where the SOTA is...
Isn't all this what idQuantique ( http://www.idquantique.com/ ) has been working on and has products for, for a couple of years now?
.but then some goober will accidentally leave his WinXP laptop at some airport security screening location and POOF! there goes your unbreakable security.
No, the levels of loss are different.
When the laptop is stolen by enemies, they gain access to all data on the laptop, which gives them a password they can use to view data the rest of your organization is currently transmitting... OR to decrypt any data they've logged you transmitting before.
If the organization used QC, that last threat is taken away. The damage from a compromised password is reduced, because the spies can't revist any old wiretap logs- for wiretapping QC is impossible.
If you are transmitting data across the internet using any kind of encryption besides OTP, then somebody can be sniffing it to a log. 50 years later, he can brute-force it with a Beowulf cluster of 40 terahertz cellphones. QC is immune to that too.
So if you're paranoid that a future historian will try to open your email, look into QC.