From eugen@leitl.org Thu Apr 22 11:38:30 2010 From: Eugen Leitl To: cypherpunks-legacy@lists.cpunks.org Subject: Re: Quantum Key Distribution: the bad idea that won't die... Date: Thu, 22 Apr 2010 11:38:30 +0000 Message-ID: <20100422153522.GO1964@leitl.org> In-Reply-To: <4D9DBB1D-12DB-4183-88F0-EEC2F7DAC8FD@bbn.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/mixed; boundary="===============7763144859787146392==" --===============7763144859787146392== Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit On Thu, Apr 22, 2010 at 09:46:18AM -0400, John Lowry wrote: > My own speculation is that the security community and its interests are > perhaps a bit broader than than some members wish it were. > > If you want to see some interesting physics that represents unexpected > results relevant to communications (and comes from entangled QKD research) > then take a look at: http://pra.aps.org/abstract/PRA/v81/i2/e023835 This is interesting. However, even if you can use LoS up to LEO, the question is of what the added value of a (supposedly, trend in QC state cloning attacks is there) tamperproof exchange is over traditional cryptography. I agree with Perry that it solves a non-problem. > There is a human-readable summary at: http://focus.aps.org/story/v25/st7 -- Eugen* Leitl leitl http://leitl.org ______________________________________________________________ ICBM: 48.07100, 11.36820 http://www.ativel.com http://postbiota.org 8B29F6BE: 099D 78BA 2FD3 B014 B08A 7779 75B0 2443 8B29 F6BE --===============7763144859787146392==--