This document discusses quantum cryptography and potential vulnerabilities in practical quantum key distribution (QKD) systems. It describes how QKD works to securely distribute a key using photons and how systems aim to detect eavesdropping by measuring error rates. However, the document outlines several hacks that have been demonstrated, including a tailored illumination attack that uses bright light pulses to operate avalanche photodiodes in the linear mode and bypass the intended detection of single photons. While the security of QKD is provably secure in theory, vulnerabilities exist in practical systems that do not meet all theoretical assumptions.

1. Quantum Cryptography
Ranveer Raaj Joyseeree & Andreas Fognini
Alice
Bob
Eve

2. Classical Algorithms
1. Asymmetrical (public-key) cryptosystems:
- First implementationnn RSA (Ronald Rivest, Adi Shamir, and Leonard Adleman) 1978
- Very convenient, Internet
- Idea is based on computational complexity f(x) = y, x = ?.
- rely on unproven assumptions
Private Public
Message
Message Encrypted message

3. Classical Algorithms
Classical Algorithms
2. Symmetrical (secret-key) cryptosystems:
- only provably secure cryptosystem known today
- not handy, key as long as message
- key only valid for one transmission
- how to send the key in a secure manner?
M: 1 0 1 0 1 0 1 0
K: 1 0 0 0 1 1 1 0
S: 0 0 1 0 0 1 0 0
Distribute key over secure channel
M
M S
S: 0 0 1 0 0 1 0 0
K: 1 0 0 0 1 1 1 0
M: 1 0 1 0 1 0 1 0
XOR XOR

4. Quantum Cryptography: The BB84 Portocol
Ingredients: 1) One photon no copying,
2) Two non orthonormal bases sets
3) Insecure classical channel; Internet
What it does: Secure distribution of a key, can't be used to send messages
How it works:
50% correlated
Physikalische Blätter 55, 25 (1999)

5. Copy machine: e.g.
Eve's copy machine
50% decrease
in correlation!
Alice and Bob recognize
attack from error rate!

6. Conclusion
 Quantum cryptography means just the
exchange of keys
 Actual transmission of data is done with
classical algorithms
 Alice & Bob can find out when Eve tries to
eavesdrop.

7. Hacking Quantum Key Distribution systems
 QKD systems promise enhanced security.
 In fact, quantum cryptography is proveably
secure.
 Surely one cannot eavesdrop on such systems,
right?

8. Hacking QKD systems
 Security is easy to prove while assuming
perfect apparatus and a noise-free channel.
 Those assumptions are not valid for practical
systems e.g. Clavis2 from ID Quantique and
QPN 5505 from MagiQ Technologies.
 Vulnerabilities thus appear.

9. Hacking by tailored illumination
 Lydersen et al. (2010) proposed a method to
eavesdrop on a QKD system undetected.
 The hack exploits a vulnerability associated with
the avalanche photo diodes (APD‘s) used to
detect photons.

10. Avalanche photo diodes
 Can detect single photons when properly set.
 However, they are sensitive to more than just
quantum states.

11. Modes of operation of APD’s
 Geiger and linear modes

12. Geiger mode
 VAPD is usually fixed and called bias voltage and in Geiger mode, Vbias > Vbr.
 An incident photon creates an electron-hole pair, leading to an avalanche of carriers
and a surge of current IAPD beyond Ith. That is detected as a click.
 Vbias is then made smaller than Vbr to stop flow of carriers. Subsequently it is restored
to its original value in preparation for the next photon.

13. Linear mode
 Vbias < Vbr.
 Detected current is proportional to incident optical power Popt.
 Clicks again occur when IAPD > Ith.

14. Operation in practical QKD systems
 Vbias is varied as shown such that APD is in Geiger mode only
when a photon is expected
 That is to minimize false detections due to thermal fluctuations.
 However, it is still sensitive to bright light in linear mode.

15. The hack in detail
 Eve uses an intercept-resend attack.
 She uses a copy of Bob to detect states in a random basis.
 Sends her results to Bob as bright light pulses, with peak power
> Pth, instead of individual photons.
 She also blinds Bob‘s APD‘s to make them operate as classical
photodiodes only at all times to improve QBER.

16. The hack in detail
 C is a 50:50 coupler used in phase-encoded QKD systems.
 When Eve‘s and Bob‘s bases match, trigger pulse from Eve constructively interferes
and hits detector corresponding to what Eve detected.
 Otherwise, no constructive interference and both detectors hit with equal energy.
 Click only observed if detected current > Ith.

17. The hack in detail
 Clicks also only observed when Eve and Bob have
matching bases.
 This means Eve and Bob now have identical bit values
and basis choices, independently of photons emitted
by Alice.
 However, half the bits are lost in the process of
eavesdropping.

18. Performance issues?
 Usually, transmittance from Alice to Bob < 50%.
 APDs have a quantum efficiency < 50%.
 However, trigger pulses cause clicks in all cases.
 Loss of bits is thus compensated for and Eve stays
undetected

19. Other methods
 Method presented is not the only known exploit.
 Zhao et al. (2008) attempted a time-shift attack.
 Xu et al. (2010) attempted a phase remapping attack.

20. Conclusion
 QKD systems are unconditionally secure, based on
the fundamental laws of physics.
 However, physical realisations of those systems
violate some of the assumptions of the security proof.
 Eavesdroppers may thus intercept sent messages
without being detected.

21.  Rev Mod Phys 74, 145 (2002)
 Physikalische Blätter 55, 25 (1999)
 Nature Photonics 4, 686 (2010)
 Experimental demonstration of phase-remapping attack in a
practical quantum key distribution system. Xu et al. (2010)
 Hacking commercial quantum cryptography systems by tailored
bright illumination. Lydersen et al. (2010)
 Quantum hacking: Experimental demonstration of time-shift
attack against practical quantum-key-distribution systems. Zhao
et al. (2008).
Used Material