Thursday, May 30, 2024

Questions about QKD

 I think quantum key distribution is fascinating, but unlikely by itself to serve as reason enough to build a Quantum Internet. Keeping in mind that I am not directly a QKD researcher, in my opinion there are several major hurdles limiting adoption of QKD today:

  • Range of QKD is limited (until we build a multihop, long-distance network).
  • Boxes are expensive, not robust, and require a lot of operational expertise.
  • Attacking QKD deployments is trivial; it's designed to detect eavesdroppers, so by its very nature acting as an eavesdropper is equivalent to launching a DoS attack.
  • Interoperability, standards and global operational confidence are still works in progress.
  • Market pull is still limited, because the problem it solves -- generating shared random or near-random bits secure enough to be used as encryption keys(*) -- still isn't tops on the list of pain points for Chief Security Officers, AND there is a classical solution in the offing (PQC) that requires "only" software and protocols, no new hardware.
  • Latency to start up a connection is orders of magnitude too high to be useful at e.g. the HTTPS level, so it has at best a specific and limited role in systems, e.g. network-to-network IPSec tunnels.
With that in mind, I recently had a discussion with a QKD researcher about how to evaluate new ideas in the area. We came up with about thirteen questions/concerns/metrics answering the question, "What do we want to improve?":
  1. Steady-state key generation rate
  2. Robustness against noise
  3. Fraction of raw resources dedicated to detecting an eavesdropper
  4. Robustness against some known attack (e.g., detector blinding or entangling with qubits)
  5. Required classical communication bandwidth/latency
  6. Simplicity of quantum hardware implementation
  7. Startup time
  8. Preconditions (e.g., pre-shared key for authentication)
  9. Classical resources required, esp. randomness
  10. Ease of integration into classical security systems
  11. Ability to use in a heterogeneous quantum network environment (e.g., full end nodes with memory v. measurement-only end nodes)
  12. Demands on or benefits to quantum network operations (e.g., link tomography or network routing)
  13. Extension to multi-party protocols
Simply playing with ideas, such as "I found this cool thing while looking at quantum graph states...", is great, and important, and that's where highly original stuff comes from. But if you bring me an idea about QKD, I'm pretty likely going to ask which of the above things it improves, or if you think it has value for some additional reason.

(*) John Mattsson of Ericsson pointed out on the QIRG mailing list that it's not accurate to say the bits are used as keys. Instead, bits from any TRNG (true, or hardware, random number generator) are actually further processed through a KDF (key derivation function) or CSPRNG (cryptographically secure pseudo-random number generator), which is then fed to AEAD (authenticated encryption with associated data) before the key that is actually used is complete and finalized. He recommends a German government document on the topic.

No comments: