China Plans To Launch the World's First 'Unhackable' Quantum Communication Network (phys.org) 72
An anonymous reader quotes Phys.org:
China is about to launch the Jinan Project, the world's first unhackable computer network, and a major milestone in the development of quantum technology... the network is planned to be fully operational by the end of August 2017... By launching the network, China will become the first country worldwide to implement quantum technology for a real life, commercial end. It also highlights that China is a key global player in the rush to develop technologies based on quantum principles, with the EU and the United States also vying for world leadership in the field.
The network, known as a quantum key distribution (QKD) network, is more secure than widely used electronic communication equivalents. Unlike a conventional telephone or internet cable, which can be tapped without the sender or recipient being aware, a QKD network alerts both users to any tampering with the system as soon as it occurs. This is because tampering immediately alters the information being relayed, with the disturbance being instantly recognisable. Once fully implemented, it will make it almost impossible for other governments to listen in on Chinese communications... It will be the world's longest land-based quantum communications network, stretching over 2,000 km.
The network, known as a quantum key distribution (QKD) network, is more secure than widely used electronic communication equivalents. Unlike a conventional telephone or internet cable, which can be tapped without the sender or recipient being aware, a QKD network alerts both users to any tampering with the system as soon as it occurs. This is because tampering immediately alters the information being relayed, with the disturbance being instantly recognisable. Once fully implemented, it will make it almost impossible for other governments to listen in on Chinese communications... It will be the world's longest land-based quantum communications network, stretching over 2,000 km.
It's heartening to see (Score:5, Insightful)
that the Chinese government finally appreciates the benefit of communication free of surveillance. [wikipedia.org]
Re: (Score:1)
that the Chinese government finally appreciates the benefit of communication free of surveillance. [wikipedia.org]
The Chinese government has limited interest in monitoring private individual-to-individual and commercial communications that would use this technology. They are mostly concerned with one-to-many platforms such as social media, that can be used to spread incorrect thinking, rile up the masses, and promote disharmony.
Re: (Score:2)
More accurately, the Chinese government is interested in monitoring anything that might threaten to reveal their toy Communist government is run by a bunch of thugs.
Re:It's heartening to see (Score:4, Informative)
Actually, the opposite is true. The Chinese government is more interested in intimidation than censorship. They try to emphasize the thuggery rather than hide it. Instead of just subtly deleting offending social media posts, the posts are often edited to replace or modify violations with warnings, to send a clear message to both posters and readers that "we are watching you".
Re: (Score:2)
BS - the Chinese gov is a bunch of thugs no different than Russia or Saudi - Nice people do go into government - anywhere.
We would be much better off without elections - picking the legislaters by a random draw of tax payers.. The one party system has failed China - as it is now failing the US (Demopublicans).
I've talked with Chinese students here for over 30 years - it is pure propaganda that they don't do slave labor - physically hitting workers is common. There is a serious problem with corruption in th
Re: (Score:2)
Nice people do NOT go into government - anywhere.[typo]
Re: It's heartening to see (Score:1)
Couldn't be more ironic (Score:2)
Not much information, (Score:3)
but the name is fairly revealing. And as typical, the media over states its capability.
quantum key distribution (QKD) - Strongly implies that the network will be used for distributing cryptographic keys. Which makes sense since the bandwidth is likely to rather limited. And that means that the actual messages using those keys are subject to possible decryption. But still a very impressive accomplishment.
Re:Not much information, (Score:4, Informative)
Any foreign company wanting to take advantage of China's cheap manufacturing services also need to hand over the related IP before being allowed to do so.
I have personally negotiated with Chinese CMs and there was never any such requirement. In fact there were many times where we took steps to ensure we retained our IP, e.g. we had the CM flash rudimentary firmware to test the hardware, with the real firmware flashed in-house later. Obviously some IP had to be sent so they could actually make the thing, but that's true no matter where your CM is based.
Maybe this can happen with very large companies where the Chinese government feels its worth it, but your claim that "any foreign company" must hand over all related IP is just not true.
Re: (Score:2)
BS - they don't care until there is a big money flow - then the party-member supervisors will see that things happen correctly.
Anyway - a huge amount of the IP in China was stolen.
Re: (Score:2)
Did you ignore my last paragraph? It looks like you ignored my last paragraph...
Re: Not much information, (Score:2)
China is at the for front of QKD research since sometime now. E.g. their collaboration with Zeilingers team have repeatedly produced world records in implementing QKD in practice.
1,379,000,000 (Score:2)
Re: Waste of money (Score:2)
QKD is a heck of a lot more practical than any of the research prpgrams you mentioned... given the ever growing improtance of (and failures in) imfo sec. I was say developing better tools for that field is a pretty worthy goal.
Unhackable? (Score:1)
Unhackable? Sounds like they're issuing a challenge. Usually when statements like this are made, they usually result in the supposedly unhackable system being hacked pretty quickly. I predict this will be hacked quickly as well.
Re:Unhackable? (Score:4, Insightful)
Probably unhackable in the same way as the Titanic was unsinkable.
Re: Unhackable? (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Now that you mention it... that would make it easier for it to jump the shark.
Re: (Score:2)
Dude... you missed the boobies!
Re:Unhackable? (Score:4, Interesting)
Smart humans have learned how to "cheat" their way around quantum limitations before... I imagine it will eventually happen with surreptitiously intercepting quantum communications as well.
But, in any case, attacking the end points is always an option.
Re: Unhackable? (Score:1)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Unhackable? Sounds like they're issuing a challenge. Usually when statements like this are made, they usually result in the supposedly unhackable system being hacked pretty quickly. I predict this will be hacked quickly as well.
The laws of physics preclude you sampling the signal without it being noticed by the intended recipient. Simple as that.
Getting around it would be... "non-trivial".
Useless against local or remote root kits (Score:2)
If the data is being written via a "network" stack, it's vulnerable to root kits on either end of the communications. It's also useless against the "Great Firewall of China", which forces access to through Chinese government owned or controlled proxies to control or monitor specific content at whim.
Re: Useless against local or remote root kits (Score:2)
Whats ur point? No secure communication system is ever going to be secure in those adversarial models... QKD or otherwise.
Re: (Score:2)
Just please, don't mistake it for "completely secure communications" because one portion of the data flow is protected. This is _China_ publishing it. They have a strong history of insisting on control of communications at several stages.
Quantum Telephones? (Score:1, Funny)
Just in case you want to say "hello" and "goodbye" at the exact same time.
Re: (Score:2)
That's a nice theory, but you can spend one and only one mod point per post.
Re: (Score:2)
The quantum duality of "aloha" is why the first Nobel Prize in Physics was awarded to King Kamehameha.
Re: Quantum Telephones? (Score:2)
Isn't it pronounced ka......me........ha.......me........haaaaaaaaaaaaaaaa
Re: (Score:2)
I believe they already have that technology in Hawaii.
Not quite that secure (Score:2)
The bitrate for quantum encryption is too slow to actually use it to encrypt the data you're transmitting. Instead, you use it to encrypt a key which you transmit to the recipient. The data is then encrypted via standard cryptography using that key - basically a one-time pad. That's why it's called Quan
Re: Not unhackable (Score:2)
that's not really how QKD works. There is no seperat "alert system". Instead, by listening in the signal between end points is unavoidably altered so the end points trivially detect that a third party was eavesdropping during the key agreement protocol. That way they know not to use whatever key was produced in that QKD session. The laws of quantum mechanics guarantee that eaves dropping always causes the signal to be changed. (E.g. as far as I underatand any violation of that would contradict the no-clonin
Re: Not unhackable (Score:2, Informative)
Still not quite right.
If someone tries to tap in, it destroys the information. So the endpoints don't actually know someone tried to tap it, they just know the data is suddenly garbage and have to find the error source in order to fix it.
Can somebody explain... (Score:2)
...why diffie-hellman isn't good enough?
Re: Can somebody explain... (Score:2)
Long term security comes to mind. A very comon use of DH protocols is to agree on a key for encrypting content. Suppose an attacker records the public keys used in the DH session as well as the subsequent encrypted content. If in 20 years they get there hands on a powerful enough quantum computer they could go back and break the DH part, redrive the encryption key and then decrypt all recorded content.
my question is why not use post-quantum (e.g. lattice based) key agreement instead of QKD... they r startin
Re: (Score:2)
kthnx
Re: Can somebody explain... (Score:1)
The reason we don't use any of the so-called post quantum key exchange protocols yet is because we don't know enough about their security profiles yet. For example we don't know how hard theu are to break so we don't know the strength parameters to use (say to make it secure for 20 years). We also don't know enough about algorithms that quantum computers could efficiently execute that might radically change these numbers.
The last thing you want to do is jump out of the frying pan and find yourself in the fi
Two Edged Sword (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Wow ok then (Score:1)