7 Feb
2017
7 Feb
'17
2:48 p.m.
On Mon, Feb 06, 2017 at 09:10:02AM -0800, Razer wrote:
I can't parse the technical stuff. Does the last paragraph mean they broke "old quantum crypto"?
From the abstract and the last paragraph of the article what I'm seeing is they can detect a hack on the data (apparently even if it's simply a regurgitation of the original) because the 'noise' created by the tampering itself appears to leave a 'standard recognizable signature'. But pardon if that's not the answer to the question you asked... as the Sj: line implies this is way above my pay-grade.
On the cryptography mailing list there is summary for smart dummies: http://www.metzdowd.com/pipermail/cryptography/2017-February/031425.html