Skip to content
NewA calmer, faster ZeroHour

Rate 1/5 Non-Malleable Codes against Entangled Split-State Tampering

arXiv cs.CRby Naresh Goud Boddu ()1 min read3 · 1 read
AI summary · grok-4.7Summaries by Vani AI

New non-malleable codes reach rate nearly 1/5 against entangled quantum split-state tampering.

The paper constructs efficient information-theoretic non-malleable codes for classical messages secure against two noncommunicating local quantum tampering operations with arbitrary pre-shared entanglement. For every small fixed xi and all sufficiently large first-share lengths n, the rate is at least 1/5 minus xi, correctness is perfect, and the error is 2 to the minus n to the power Omega(1). Security holds for every message with a single message-independent simulator per attack. The construction adapts the permutation-based split-state codes of Batra, Boddu, and Jain by replacing a uniform message with a prescribed message plus fresh padding.

Key facts
  • Codes resist two noncommunicating quantum tamperers that share arbitrary entanglement.
  • Rate is at least 1/5 minus a small constant, with perfect correctness.
  • Error is 2 to the minus n to a positive power for large first-share length n.
  • Worst-case messages use one message-independent simulator for each attack.
Analyze this story with Vani AIImpact, who is affected and what defenders should do, in a new chat

From the original article

1 min read at arxiv.org

We construct efficient information-theoretic non-malleable codes for classical messages that are secure against two noncommunicating local quantum tampering operations with arbitrary pre-shared entanglement. For every sufficiently small fixed $ξ>0$ and all sufficiently large first-share lengths $n$, the codes have rate at least $1/5-ξ$, perfect correctness, and error $2^{-n^{Ω(1)}}$.

arXiv cs.CR

By Naresh Goud Boddu · arxiv.org

Read the full article at arXiv cs.CR

A short excerpt; the article and its images belong to the publisher. Summary, key facts and assessment above are AI-written from the article and can be wrong.