2006
DOI: 10.1103/physreva.73.044304
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Nonequivalence of two flavors of oblivious transfer at the quantum level

Abstract: Though all-or-nothing oblivious transfer and one-out-of-two oblivious transfer are equivalent in classical cryptography, we here show that a protocol built upon secure quantum all-or-nothing oblivious transfer cannot satisfy the rigorous definition of quantum one-out-of-two oblivious transfer due to the nature of quantum cryptography. Thus the securities of the two oblivious transfer protocols are not equivalent at the quantum level.

Help me understand this report
View preprint versions

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
2
1
1
1

Citation Types

0
34
0

Year Published

2009
2009
2024
2024

Publication Types

Select...
7
1
1

Relationship

0
9

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 18 publications
(34 citation statements)
references
References 8 publications
0
34
0
Order By: Relevance
“…The security proof is given and the non-equivalence(?) of quantum secret all-or-non oblivious transfer protocol and quantum two-take-one oblivious transfer protocol is proved [He and Wang (2006)]. In 2007, Colbeck et al further studied the five conditions security of the two-party classic calculation, which showed that there was no unconditional secure classical calculation and illustrated the transmission results through quantum oblivious transfer [Colbeck (2007)].…”
Section: Quantum Oblivious Transfer (Qot)mentioning
confidence: 99%
“…The security proof is given and the non-equivalence(?) of quantum secret all-or-non oblivious transfer protocol and quantum two-take-one oblivious transfer protocol is proved [He and Wang (2006)]. In 2007, Colbeck et al further studied the five conditions security of the two-party classic calculation, which showed that there was no unconditional secure classical calculation and illustrated the transmission results through quantum oblivious transfer [Colbeck (2007)].…”
Section: Quantum Oblivious Transfer (Qot)mentioning
confidence: 99%
“…For the security of OT 2 1 protocol, He [61] has proved that the OT 2 1 protocol implemented upon all-or-nothing OT is not covered by the cheating strategy in Ref. [17].…”
Section: The Security Of Qotmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Thus, having secure quantum oblivious transfer protocol does not necessarily mean that it is possible to construct secure 1out-of-2 oblivious transfer. Indeed, He and Wang recently showed that in quantum domain the various types of oblivious transfer are no longer equivalent [HW06b] and constructed a secure quantum single-bit oblivious transfer [HW06a] using entanglement. Consequently, classical reductions of single-bit to a bit-string protocols are also compromised in the quantum setting and need to be re-examined.…”
Section: Further Developing Wiesner Ideas Bennett and Brassard Presementioning
confidence: 99%
“…In Figure 2 we present quantum reductions between cryptographic primitives. Note that, despite the mentioned controversial (and not widely accepted within the community) results by He and Wang [HW06b,HW06a], the recent construction of a single-bit 1-out-of-2 oblivious transfer out of an ordinary (i.e., all-or-nothing) OT [MP16] leaves the question of the equivalence between the two flavours of the protocol open. In this paper, we present a quantum oblivious transfer protocol for bit-strings, based on the recently proposed public key cryptosystem [Nik08].…”
Section: Further Developing Wiesner Ideas Bennett and Brassard Presementioning
confidence: 99%