Prepare-and-measure quantum key distribution from a bound on information leakage
Abstract
Every quantum key distribution (QKD) protocol must limit the information available outside the users' laboratories. In device-independent QKD this is essentially the only assumption made on the devices. In a prepare-and-measure setting it cannot be imposed strictly, since the sender's device must emit a signal that depends on her private input. The natural replacement, and a minimal one, is a leakage bound: a bound on how much information about the input leaves the sender's laboratory, through the intended signal or through any side channel. We ask how far this unavoidable requirement can replace a detailed model of the source. We show that this single bound, quantified by the probability of guessing the input from everything the source emits, suffices to prove security against collective attacks. In our analysis, nothing is assumed about the precise form of the emitted states, their dimension, energy or purity, nor about the receiver's measurement device, beyond the standard requirement that it does not leak Bob's data. The standard B92 and BB84 protocols do not certify any key under this minimal leakage bound assumption. But closely related protocols can and, in the ideal limit, achieve one secret bit per key round. For noisy implementations, we compute key rates using semidefinite programming relaxations. Our best protocols tolerate visibilities down to 0.84, corresponding to an 8% quantum bit error rate, compared with the 11% threshold of standard device-dependent BB84.
Related
- Continuous variable quantum key distribution through a fading channel with minimal information leakage
- Quantum prepare-and-measure scenarios: concepts and methods
- Deterministic Minimum-Leakage Continuous-Variable Quantum Key Distribution with Phase-Conjugated Twin Beams
- Certification of Absolutely Entangled Sets in the Prepare-and-Measure Scenario
- Noncontextuality inequalities for prepare-transform-measure scenarios
BibTeX
@misc{mishra2026prepareandmeasure,
title = {{Prepare-and-measure quantum key distribution from a bound on information leakage}},
author = {Abhishek Mishra and Michele Masini and Maria Balanzó-Juandó and Armin Tavakoli and Stefano Pironio},
howpublished = {arXiv},
year = {2026},
month = oct,
doi = {10.48550/arxiv.2610.37296},
eprint = {2610.37296},
archivePrefix = {arXiv},
url = {https://arxiv.org/abs/2610.37296},
}
RIS
TY - UNPB
TI - Prepare-and-measure quantum key distribution from a bound on information leakage
AU - Abhishek Mishra
AU - Michele Masini
AU - Maria Balanzó-Juandó
AU - Armin Tavakoli
AU - Stefano Pironio
PY - 2026
DA - 2026/10/27
PB - arXiv
DO - 10.48550/arxiv.2610.37296
UR - https://arxiv.org/abs/2610.37296
AB - Every quantum key distribution (QKD) protocol must limit the information available outside the users' laboratories. In device-independent QKD this is essentially the only assumption made on the devices. In a prepare-and-measure setting it cannot be imposed strictly, since the sender's device must emit a signal that depends on her private input. The natural replacement, and a minimal one, is a leakage bound: a bound on how much information about the input leaves the sender's laboratory, through the intended signal or through any side channel. We ask how far this unavoidable requirement can replace a detailed model of the source. We show that this single bound, quantified by the probability of guessing the input from everything the source emits, suffices to prove security against collective attacks. In our analysis, nothing is assumed about the precise form of the emitted states, their dimension, energy or purity, nor about the receiver's measurement device, beyond the standard requirement that it does not leak Bob's data. The standard B92 and BB84 protocols do not certify any key under this minimal leakage bound assumption. But closely related protocols can and, in the ideal limit, achieve one secret bit per key round. For noisy implementations, we compute key rates using semidefinite programming relaxations. Our best protocols tolerate visibilities down to 0.84, corresponding to an 8% quantum bit error rate, compared with the 11% threshold of standard device-dependent BB84.
ER -