4.3 Article

Two-party quantum private comparison protocol with maximally entangled seven-qubit state

期刊

MODERN PHYSICS LETTERS A
卷 34, 期 28, 页码 -

出版社

WORLD SCIENTIFIC PUBL CO PTE LTD
DOI: 10.1142/S0217732319502298

关键词

Information security; quantum cryptography; secure multi-party quantum computation; quantum private comparison; maximally entangled seven-qubit state

资金

  1. State Key Program of National Natural Science of China [61332019]
  2. Major State Basic Research Development Program of China (973 Program) [2014CB340601]
  3. National Science Foundation of China [61202386, 61402339]
  4. National Cryptography Development Fund [MMJJ201701304]

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Quantum private comparison (QPC), whose security is based on some laws of quantum mechanics (e.g. quantum noncloning theorem and Heisenbergs uncertainty principle), allows n(n >= 2) parties who do not trust each other to judge whether their secret data are the same while maintaining data privacy. In this paper, we investigate the utility of the maximally entangled seven-qubit state for QPC, and we propose a new protocol which enables two parties to compare their secret data with each other for equality without disclosing their secret data. In our protocol, single particle measurements and Bell-basis measurements are employed, both of which can be implemented with current technologies. In addition to quantum measurements, our protocol does not use other quantum technologies such as entanglement swapping and unitary operations. A semi-honest third-party who assists two parties in implementing the protocol is assumed in our protocol. Furthermore, we use the entanglement correlations of the maximally entangled seven-qubit state and collaborative computing between parties for privacy protection, and we use quantum key distribution (QKD) to ensure the security of the cooperative computing when two parties are in different locations. What is more, we show that the security towards both outsider and insider attacks can be guaranteed.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.3
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据