|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| home | help | back | first | fref | pref | prev | next | nref | lref | last | post |
Date: Thu, 29 Jun 2000 14:26:34 +0200 (MET DST) Message-Id: <UTC200006291226.OAA218868.ray@ark.cwi.nl> From: "R. Hirschfeld" <R.Hirschfeld@cwi.nl> To: staym@accessdata.com Cc: coderpunks@toad.com, cryptography@c2.net In-reply-to: <3957B4D1.48BB@accessdata.com> (staym@accessdata.com) Reply-To: ray@unipay.nl According to a source in the area who I consider to be reliable, Dominic Mayers's impossibility theorem applies, and this result is therefore incorrect. I'd thus encourage people to check the paper thoroughly before relying on its results. I haven't done so myself because I suspect much of the quantum math is beyond me. > From: staym@accessdata.com > Date: Mon, 26 Jun 2000 13:53:53 -0600 > > Today on http://xxx.lanl.gov/list/quant-ph/new > > quant-ph/0006109 [abs, src, ps, other] : > > Title: Unconditionally Secure Quantum Bit Commitment Is Possible > Authors: Horace P. Yuen > Comments: 12 pages > > Bit commitment involves the submission of evidence from one party > to another so that the evidence can be used to confirm a later revealed > bit value by the first party, while the second party cannot determine > the bit value from the evidence alone. An unconditionally secure bit > commitment protocol utilizing quantum states is presented. A proper > formulation brings out the general condition for successful cheating. > > Problems in previous proofs on the general impossibility of quantum > bit commitment are indicated. (10kb) > -- > Mike Stay > Programmer / Crypto guy > AccessData Corp. > staym@accessdata.com > >
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| home | help | back | first | fref | pref | prev | next | nref | lref | last | post |