2022
DOI: 10.48550/arxiv.2212.04807
|View full text |Cite
Preprint
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Realistic Threat Models for Satellite-Based Quantum Key Distribution

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
1
1

Citation Types

0
2
0

Year Published

2024
2024
2024
2024

Publication Types

Select...
1

Relationship

0
1

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 1 publication
(2 citation statements)
references
References 0 publications
0
2
0
Order By: Relevance
“…In this work, the ground-station altitude is denoted as h 0 , the satellite zenith angle at the ground station is denoted as θ z , and the satellite altitude at θ z = 0 is denoted as H. The channel distance can then be given by L = (H − h 0 )/ cos θ z . We assume a restricted eavesdropping scenario where the channel is monitored [25], and hence Eve is passive and not able to perform an active attack [38]. However, as indicated in figure 2, we allow Eve to capture all the lost light.…”
Section: System Modelmentioning
confidence: 99%
See 1 more Smart Citation
“…In this work, the ground-station altitude is denoted as h 0 , the satellite zenith angle at the ground station is denoted as θ z , and the satellite altitude at θ z = 0 is denoted as H. The channel distance can then be given by L = (H − h 0 )/ cos θ z . We assume a restricted eavesdropping scenario where the channel is monitored [25], and hence Eve is passive and not able to perform an active attack [38]. However, as indicated in figure 2, we allow Eve to capture all the lost light.…”
Section: System Modelmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Unlike fibre links, the direct line-of-sight link can be monitored by the trusted parties, meaning the eavesdropper (Eve) has limited access to the channel. As a result the only plausible attack on an LCS system is a passive one in which lost light is intercepted by the eavesdropper [25,26].…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%