History, context, QKD and the Internet
I'm old enough to remember hearing (I've worked at BBN for a long time now) that connecting computers on a large scale just isn't going to work, that I would never need more than 4MB of main memory, etc. Any reader can fill out the rest without my risking being pedantic. I do remember before public key when symmetric keys were delivered by an extended workforce and no-one believed there would be a need for consumer crypto. I also remember lots of questions about PK, its validity and management - some of which are still being asked. Is there a hash algorithm that _everyone_ is satisfied with ? Authentication before PK was possession of the secret key. The world of computing and communication sure looks different 40+ years later. So I encourage you to look at QKD in context. I know everything is moving in internet time but remember just how recently QKD has been dragged off of the physics optics bench by some engineers to see what can be done with it. Also, a small revolution has been taking place while discussion (on this list anyway) has focused on 1st generation QKD. Several very high speed (up to nominal line speed) systems have been proposed. Long-haul all- optical networks are being researched, and some will be built. The problem of authentication is well understood, even it it hasn't been solved. Of course, you have to keep up with the literature and not remain stuck in the '80s with BB84. We live in internet time. John - The Cryptography Mailing List Unsubscribe by sending unsubscribe cryptography to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: History, context, QKD and the Internet
At 11:08 PM 6/26/2007, John Lowry wrote: ... Also, a small revolution has been taking place while discussion (on this list anyway) has focused on 1st generation QKD. Several very high speed (up to nominal line speed) systems have been proposed. Long-haul all- optical networks are being researched, and some will be built. The problem of authentication is well understood, even it it hasn't been solved. Hmmm, this is very interesting bootstrapping and false matching. 1. You are mentioning 1st generation QKD. Do we have now 2nd generation of QKD? Where the 1st generation QKD was applied and used? Nowhere! What are the upgrades and the new things that 2nd generation QKD has? Our 1st generation of Snake Oil was excellent, but unfortunately was sharply attacked by the people from the field of Cryptology, and consequently it was not broadly accepted. But wait a minute, we have come now with our 2nd generation of Snake Oil. It is even better than the first one, and it is cheaper. Previously if you had to pay $100,000 per year for the secure link, now you have to pay 10 times less i.e. only $10,000. That is $90,000 saving per year, and imagine for what scientific purposes you can spend those $90,000. ... 2. All optical networks are reality and nowadays are built even for home-end users. What that fact has to do with x-th generation of QKD? In your post you are using the success in one field in Physics to advocate possible acceptance of another (Quantum Cryptography). While, the optical physics has and will have one of the crucial roles in modern and future Internet (taking care about the physical layer of the network), QC is trying to offer better solutions (or replace some parts) of a well developed, well established, and well applied scientific field (The field of Cryptology). My opinion is that it won't happen. Dead end. Danilo! -- No virus found in this outgoing message. Checked by AVG Free Edition. Version: 7.5.472 / Virus Database: 269.9.6/865 - Release Date: 6/24/2007 8:33 AM - The Cryptography Mailing List Unsubscribe by sending unsubscribe cryptography to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: History, context, QKD and the Internet
John Lowry [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: The world of computing and communication sure looks different 40+ years later. So I encourage you to look at QKD in context. I know everything is moving in internet time but remember just how recently QKD has been dragged off of the physics optics bench by some engineers to see what can be done with it. Also, a small revolution has been taking place while discussion (on this list anyway) has focused on 1st generation QKD. Several very high speed (up to nominal line speed) systems have been proposed. Long-haul all- optical networks are being researched, and some will be built. The problem of authentication is well understood, even it it hasn't been solved. The issue isn't the speed of the QKD systems, or the distance that they run over. Those are false issues. The issue is that they provide you with much less than conventional technologies give you, and at a high price. Repeating: 1) No one is contending that QKD doesn't work as advertised per se. The problem is that the advertised functionality is not what anyone wants. 2) The technology is a lead balloon. It gives you nothing that you don't already have, but at an unaffordable price, and on top of it, it gives you *much less* than you already have -- for example, it is more or less useless in providing security in an internet context -- the internet is all about getting rid of dedicated point to point connections. Of course, you have to keep up with the literature and not remain stuck in the '80s with BB84. You remember people saying that networks would never work. (I don't remember that kind of statement being made, but never mind.) You encourage us to remember all the things people were negative on but became big hits. I encourage you to remember bubble memory, DCE, jet packs, and assorted other technologies that went nowhere fast. Perry - The Cryptography Mailing List Unsubscribe by sending unsubscribe cryptography to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
