pith. sign in

arxiv: 2606.25037 · v1 · pith:JPFGW3QSnew · submitted 2026-06-23 · 🪐 quant-ph

Arbitrarily Loss-Tolerant Quantum Position Verification in a Single Execution

Lloren\c{c} Escol\`a-Farr\`as , Boris \v{S}kori\'c , Florian Speelman This is my paper

Pith reviewed 2026-06-25 23:41 UTC · model grok-4.3

classification 🪐 quant-ph
keywords quantum position verificationloss tolerancesingle-shot protocolBB84no-signalling correlationsentangled adversariescommitment schemephoton loss
0
0 comments X

The pith

A no-signalling lift of commitment techniques yields the first single-execution quantum position verification protocol that tolerates arbitrary photon loss while keeping exponential security against entangled attackers.

A machine-rendered reading of the paper's core claim, the machinery that carries it, and where it could break.

The paper shows how to adapt a commitment modification, previously limited to sequential repetitions, so that it works in a single parallel execution of a BB84-based quantum position verification protocol. The key step uses no-signalling correlations to prevent new attack vectors when the prover's responses are sent simultaneously. With a threshold k on the number of qubits that must be successfully committed, the probability that an entangled attacker is accepted falls exponentially in k. The protocol stays secure against bounded-entanglement adversaries, tolerates noise up to 3.7 percent, and works even when quantum communication is arbitrarily slow, thereby removing the distance barrier that loss imposed on earlier single-shot schemes.

Core claim

By utilizing different techniques based on no-signalling correlations, the commitment modification is lifted to the parallel regime while preserving the security guarantees of the underlying QPV protocol. Applying this to a BB84-based QPV protocol suitable for near-term implementation and secure against bounded-entanglement adversaries, fixing a threshold k on the number of successfully committed qubits yields an adversarial acceptance probability that decays exponentially in k. The resulting protocol maintains robustness to noise levels of up to 3.7% and remains secure under arbitrarily slow quantum communication.

What carries the argument

The commitment-based modification lifted from sequential to parallel execution via no-signalling correlations, applied to a BB84 QPV protocol with a threshold k on successful commitments.

If this is right

  • Adversarial acceptance probability decays exponentially in the threshold k.
  • The protocol tolerates arbitrary photon loss in one execution while retaining security.
  • Security holds against entangled attackers even when quantum messages travel arbitrarily slowly.
  • The same technique yields improved quantitative parameters when re-applied to sequential protocols.
  • QPV becomes feasible over arbitrary distances without requiring multiple rounds.

Where Pith is reading between the lines

These are editorial extensions of the paper, not claims the author makes directly.

  • The no-signalling lifting technique may apply to other quantum cryptographic tasks that combine commitments with parallel message exchange.
  • Moderate values of k could already deliver practical security levels in laboratory settings with current single-photon sources.
  • The 3.7 percent noise tolerance sets a concrete benchmark that future experiments can target or exceed.
  • The exponential decay suggests that security margins improve predictably with hardware improvements that raise the effective k.

Load-bearing premise

No-signalling correlations suffice to lift the commitment modification to parallel execution without creating new attack strategies or weakening the original BB84 security against bounded-entanglement adversaries.

What would settle it

An explicit entangled attack strategy on the parallel committed protocol whose acceptance probability fails to decay exponentially with the threshold k.

Figures

Figures reproduced from arXiv: 2606.25037 by Boris \v{S}kori\'c, Florian Speelman, Lloren\c{c} Escol\`a-Farr\`as.

Figure 1
Figure 1. Figure 1: Description of the QPVf∶n→m BB84 protocol. In [EFS25], it was shown that for a suitable class of functions f (see (8)), the protocol is secure against adversaries in the BE(O(n)) model, i.e., adversaries pre-sharing a number of entangled qubits linear in the size of the classical information. We now describe some structural properties of the function f that are relevant for the security analysis. The funct… view at source ↗
Figure 2
Figure 2. Figure 2: Schematic representation of QPVf∶n→m BB84 . may be substantial over long distances. As discussed in the introduction, this creates a fundamental vulnerability: an adversary can measure each incoming qubit in a randomly chosen basis and only report outcomes for those qubits for which the guess was correct, declaring loss otherwise. Since the adversary succeeds with probability 1/2 on each qubit, any protoco… view at source ↗
Figure 3
Figure 3. Figure 3: Description of the c-QPVf∶n→m BB84 protocol 4 Security Analysis of c-QPVf∶n→m BB84 As is customary in the literature, we consider the purified version of c-QPVf∶n→m BB84 , which is equiva￾lent to the original protocol. In this formulation, V0 prepares m EPR pairs ∣Φ + ⟩V1Q1⊗⋯⊗∣Φ + ⟩VmQm, and sends the qubit registers Q1, . . . , Qm to the prover. At a later stage, V0 measures the local registers V1 . . . V… view at source ↗
Figure 4
Figure 4. Figure 4: Schematic representation of c-QPVf∶n→m BB84 . Unlike [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p008_4.png] view at source ↗
Figure 5
Figure 5. Figure 5: Schematic representation of a general attack on [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p009_5.png] view at source ↗
Figure 6
Figure 6. Figure 6: Description of the (c-QPVf BB84) m protocol Similarly to c-QPVf∶n→m BB84 in Section 4, we analyze the security of c-QPVf BB84 via its purified formulation. In each round i, the verifiers prepare an EPR pair ∣Φ + ⟩V Q and send the register Q to 13 [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p013_6.png] view at source ↗
read the original abstract

Quantum position verification (QPV) seeks to certify the spatial location of an untrusted prover, but is challenged fundamentally by entanglement-based attacks and experimentally by photon loss. Both issues were addressed separately in different works and were simultaneously resolved for sequentially repeated protocols in \textit{Phys.\ Rev.\ Lett.}\ \textbf{135},~260801 via a commitment-based modification that renders security independent of transmission losses. However, single-execution protocols are preferable in practice, and the original techniques do not extend to the parallel setting due to their reliance on sequential structure. We overcome this by utilizing different techniques based on no-signalling correlations, lifting the commitment modification to the parallel regime while preserving the security guarantees of the underlying QPV protocol. Applying this to a BB84-based QPV protocol suitable for near-term implementation and secure against bounded-entanglement adversaries, we prove that fixing a threshold~$k$ on the number of successfully committed qubits yields an adversarial acceptance probability that decays exponentially in~$k$. The resulting protocol maintains robustness to noise levels of up to~$3.7\%$ and remains secure under arbitrarily slow quantum communication, as does the original protocol. This yields the first fully loss-tolerant single-shot QPV protocol secure against entangled attackers, making QPV feasible over arbitrary distances. Finally, we refine the sequential analysis and obtain improved quantitative parameters for experimental implementations.

Editorial analysis

A structured set of objections, weighed in public.

Desk editor's note, referee report, simulated authors' rebuttal, and a circularity audit. Tearing a paper down is the easy half of reading it; the pith above is the substance, this is the friction.

Referee Report

1 major / 2 minor

Summary. The paper claims to develop a technique using no-signalling correlations to adapt a commitment-based modification for loss-tolerance in quantum position verification (QPV) from sequential to parallel (single-execution) settings. Applied to a BB84 QPV protocol secure against bounded-entanglement adversaries, it establishes that imposing a threshold k on the number of successfully committed qubits results in an adversarial acceptance probability that decays exponentially with k. The protocol is shown to tolerate up to 3.7% noise and remain secure even with arbitrarily slow quantum communication, providing the first fully loss-tolerant single-shot QPV protocol secure against entangled attackers. Additionally, the sequential analysis is refined for improved parameters.

Significance. If the central claims hold, this work represents a significant advance in making QPV practical for arbitrary distances by resolving both entanglement attacks and photon loss in a single execution. The explicit exponential security bound and noise tolerance threshold are particularly valuable for experimental implementations. The refinement of the sequential protocol parameters also contributes to the field by improving quantitative bounds for near-term setups. The use of no-signalling to lift the security argument is a novel technical contribution.

major comments (1)
  1. [Section 3] Section 3 (No-Signalling Lift to Parallel Regime): The argument that no-signalling correlations suffice to extend the commitment security from sequential to parallel execution without introducing new attack vectors for bounded-entanglement adversaries needs to explicitly rule out joint strategies where the prover prepares a single entangled state across all qubits to correlate commitment successes. The current bound on adversarial acceptance probability decaying as exp(-c k) relies on this lift; if parallel correlations allow a higher acceptance rate, the exponential decay and 3.7% noise robustness would not hold at the claimed rate. Please provide the explicit calculation or lemma showing that the parallel attack probability is bounded by the sequential one under the no-signalling assumption.
minor comments (2)
  1. [Abstract] Abstract: The claim of 'first fully loss-tolerant single-shot QPV' should briefly reference the precise prior works it improves upon to avoid any ambiguity in the novelty statement.
  2. [Abstract] The noise robustness figure of 3.7% is stated without an accompanying equation or table reference in the abstract; adding a pointer to the relevant derivation in the main text would improve clarity.

Simulated Author's Rebuttal

1 responses · 0 unresolved

We thank the referee for their careful reading of our manuscript and for their constructive feedback. We are grateful for the positive assessment of the significance of our results. We address the major comment below.

read point-by-point responses

  1. Referee: [Section 3] Section 3 (No-Signalling Lift to Parallel Regime): The argument that no-signalling correlations suffice to extend the commitment security from sequential to parallel execution without introducing new attack vectors for bounded-entanglement adversaries needs to explicitly rule out joint strategies where the prover prepares a single entangled state across all qubits to correlate commitment successes. The current bound on adversarial acceptance probability decaying as exp(-c k) relies on this lift; if parallel correlations allow a higher acceptance rate, the exponential decay and 3.7% noise robustness would not hold at the claimed rate. Please provide the explicit calculation or lemma showing that the parallel attack probability is bounded by the sequential one under the no-signalling assumption.

    Authors: We agree with the referee that an explicit demonstration is necessary to fully substantiate the lift. In the revised manuscript, we will insert a dedicated lemma in Section 3 that proves, under the no-signalling assumption, that the acceptance probability for any parallel strategy is at most that of the corresponding sequential strategy for bounded-entanglement adversaries. The lemma rules out beneficial joint entanglement strategies by showing that no-signalling implies the marginals on individual commitments are independent of the others in a way that prevents correlation-based boosting of the threshold-k success rate. This preserves the exponential decay exp(-c k) and the 3.7% noise tolerance. We believe this addition will address the concern directly. revision: yes

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged

Minor self-citation to sequential protocol; parallel lift uses independent no-signalling argument without reduction to inputs

full rationale

The paper cites Phys. Rev. Lett. 135, 260801 for the sequential commitment modification and applies standard no-signalling correlations to extend it to parallel execution while preserving BB84 QPV security against bounded-entanglement adversaries. The exponential decay claim for threshold k follows from this lift. No self-definitional equations, fitted parameters renamed as predictions, or load-bearing self-citation chains appear; the central derivation relies on external no-signalling principles and prior security results that are not shown to reduce to the present paper's own fitted values or definitions. This is a normal minor self-citation case with independent content remaining.

Axiom & Free-Parameter Ledger

0 free parameters · 1 axioms · 0 invented entities

The central claim rests on the standard no-signalling principle of quantum mechanics to extend commitments to parallel executions and on the pre-existing security of the BB84-based QPV protocol against bounded-entanglement adversaries. No free parameters or new entities are introduced.

axioms (1)
  • standard math Quantum mechanics obeys the no-signalling principle
    Invoked to lift the commitment modification to the parallel regime while preserving security.

pith-pipeline@v0.9.1-grok · 5787 in / 1293 out tokens · 39118 ms · 2026-06-25T23:41:01.124232+00:00 · methodology

discussion (0)

Sign in with ORCID, Apple, or X to comment. Anyone can read and Pith papers without signing in.

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

27 extracted references · 15 canonical work pages · 2 internal anchors

  1. [1]

    [ABSV21] Rene Allerstorfer, Harry Buhrman, Florian Speelman, and Philip Verduyn Lunel

    URL: https://arxiv.org/abs/2312.12614,arXiv:2312.12614. [ABSV21] Rene Allerstorfer, Harry Buhrman, Florian Speelman, and Philip Verduyn Lunel. Towards practical and error-robust quantum position verification.arXiv preprint arXiv:2106.12911,

    arXiv

  2. [2]

    Certified randomness implies secure classical position- verification.arXiv preprint arXiv:2410.03982,

    18 [ACC+24] Omar Amer, Kaushik Chakraborty, David Cui, Fatih Kaleoglu, Charles Lim, Minzhao Liu, and Marco Pistoia. Certified randomness implies secure classical position- verification.arXiv preprint arXiv:2410.03982,

    arXiv

  3. [3]

    [BCS22] Andreas Bluhm, Matthias Christandl, and Florian Speelman

    URL: https://doi.org/10.1137%2F130913687,doi:10.1137/130913687. [BCS22] Andreas Bluhm, Matthias Christandl, and Florian Speelman. A single-qubit position verification protocol that is secure against multi-qubit attacks.Nature Physics, pages 1–4,

    work page doi:10.1137/130913687

  4. [4]

    [BHM+26] Andreas Bluhm, Simon Höfer, Alex May, Mikka Stasiuk, Philip Verduyn Lunel, and Henry Yuen

    URL:https://doi.org/10.1145% 2F2422436.2422455,doi:10.1145/2422436.2422455. [BHM+26] Andreas Bluhm, Simon Höfer, Alex May, Mikka Stasiuk, Philip Verduyn Lunel, and Henry Yuen. A complexity theory for non-local quantum computation,

    work page doi:10.1145/2422436.2422455

  5. [5]

    [BK11] Salman Beigi and Robert König

    URL: https://arxiv.org/abs/2505.23893,arXiv:2505.23893. [BK11] Salman Beigi and Robert König. Simplified instantaneous non-local quantum com- putation with applications to position-based cryptography.New Journal of Physics, 13(9):093036, sep

    arXiv

  6. [6]

    [CGMO09] Nishanth Chandran, Vipul Goyal, Ryan Moriarty, and Rafail Ostrovsky

    URL:https://doi.org/10.1088%2F1367-2630%2F13%2F9% 2F093036,doi:10.1088/1367-2630/13/9/093036. [CGMO09] Nishanth Chandran, Vipul Goyal, Ryan Moriarty, and Rafail Ostrovsky. Position based cryptography. InAdvances in Cryptology - CRYPTO 2009, 29th Annual International Cryptology Conference, volume 5677 ofLecture Notes in Computer Science, pages 391–

    work page doi:10.1088/1367-2630/13/9/093036 2009

  7. [7]

    [CL15] Kaushik Chakraborty and Anthony Leverrier

    URL:https://www.iacr.org/archive/crypto2009/56770386/ 56770386.pdf,doi:10.1007/978-3-642-03356-8_23. [CL15] Kaushik Chakraborty and Anthony Leverrier. Practical position-based quantum cryp- tography.Physical Review A, 92(5), nov

    work page doi:10.1007/978-3-642-03356-8_23

  8. [8]

    [CM22] Sam Cree and Alex May

    URL:https://doi.org/10.1103% 2Fphysreva.92.052304,doi:10.1103/physreva.92.052304. [CM22] Sam Cree and Alex May. Code-routing: a new attack on position-verification.arXiv preprint arXiv:2202.07812,

    work page doi:10.1103/physreva.92.052304

  9. [9]

    Non-local computation of quantum circuits with small light cones.arXiv preprint arXiv:2203.10106,

    [DC22] Kfir Dolev and Sam Cree. Non-local computation of quantum circuits with small light cones.arXiv preprint arXiv:2203.10106,

    arXiv

  10. [10]

    Constraining the doability of relativistic quantum tasks.arXiv preprint arXiv:1909.05403,

    [Dol19] Kfir Dolev. Constraining the doability of relativistic quantum tasks.arXiv preprint arXiv:1909.05403,

    arXiv 1909

  11. [11]

    org/abs/2410.22157,arXiv:2410.22157

    URL:https://arxiv. org/abs/2410.22157,arXiv:2410.22157. [EFS23] Llorenç Escolà-Farràs and Florian Speelman. Single-qubit loss-tolerant quantum po- sition verification protocol secure against entangled attackers.Physical Review Let- ters, 131(14), October

    arXiv

  12. [12]

    140802,doi:10.1103/physrevlett.131.140802

    URL:http://dx.doi.org/10.1103/PhysRevLett.131. 140802,doi:10.1103/physrevlett.131.140802. [EFS25] Llorenç Escolà-Farràs and Florian Speelman. Quantum position verification in one shot: parallel repetition of thef-bb84 andf-routing protocols,

    work page doi:10.1103/physrevlett.131

  13. [13]

    URL:https: //arxiv.org/abs/2503.09544,arXiv:2503.09544. 19 [FYSZ+26] Guan-Jie Fan-Yuan, Yang-Guang Shan, Cong Zhang, Yu-Long Wang, Yu-Xuan Fan, Wei-Xin Xie, De-Yong He, Shuang Wang, Zhen-Qiang Yin, Wei Chen, Song-Nian Fu, Guang-Can Guo, and Zheng-Fu Han. Relativistic position verification with coherent states,

    arXiv

  14. [14]

    [GC19] Alvin Gonzales and Eric Chitambar

    URL:https://arxiv.org/abs/2602.01787,arXiv:2602.01787. [GC19] Alvin Gonzales and Eric Chitambar. Bounds on instantaneous nonlocal quantum com- putation.IEEE Transactions on Information Theory, 66(5):2951–2963,

    arXiv

  15. [15]

    18961,arXiv:2601.18961

    URL:https://arxiv.org/abs/2601. 18961,arXiv:2601.18961. [GLW16] Fei Gao, Bin Liu, and QiaoYan Wen. Quantum position verification in bounded-attack- frequency model.SCIENCE CHINA Physics, Mechanics & Astronomy, 59(11):1–11,

    arXiv

  16. [16]

    Springer, 2016.doi:10.1007/ 978-3-662-49725-8

    [Hay16] Masahito Hayashi.Quantum information theory. Springer, 2016.doi:10.1007/ 978-3-662-49725-8. [KMS11] Adrian Kent, William J. Munro, and Timothy P. Spiller. Quantum tagging: Authenti- cating location via quantum information and relativistic signaling constraints.Physi- cal Review A, 84(1),

    2016

  17. [17]

    [KMSB06] Adrian Kent, William Munro, Timothy Spiller, and Raymond Beausoleil

    URL:http://dx.doi.org/10.1103/PhysRevA.84.012326, doi:10.1103/physreva.84.012326. [KMSB06] Adrian Kent, William Munro, Timothy Spiller, and Raymond Beausoleil. Tagging systems,

    work page doi:10.1103/physreva.84.012326

  18. [18]

    [KPB+25] Kirsten Kanneworff, Mio Poortvliet, Dirk Bouwmeester, Rene Allerstorfer, Philip Ver- duyn Lunel, Florian Speelman, Harry Buhrman, Petr Steindl, and Wolfgang Löffler

    US Patent 2006/0022832. [KPB+25] Kirsten Kanneworff, Mio Poortvliet, Dirk Bouwmeester, Rene Allerstorfer, Philip Ver- duyn Lunel, Florian Speelman, Harry Buhrman, Petr Steindl, and Wolfgang Löffler. Towards experimental demonstration of quantum position verification using true sin- gle photons.arXiv preprint arXiv:2502.04125,

    arXiv 2006

  19. [19]

    [KPCL25] Wen Yu Kon, Ignatius William Primaatmaja, Kaushik Chakraborty, and Charles Lim

    URL:https://arxiv.org/abs/ 2502.04125,arXiv:2502.04125,doi:10.48550/arXiv.2502.04125. [KPCL25] Wen Yu Kon, Ignatius William Primaatmaja, Kaushik Chakraborty, and Charles Lim. Quantum secure key exchange with position-based credentials,

    work page doi:10.48550/arxiv.2502.04125

  20. [20]

    [Kra71] Karl Kraus

    URL:https: //arxiv.org/abs/2506.03549,arXiv:2506.03549. [Kra71] Karl Kraus. General state changes in quantum theory.Annals of Physics, 64(2):311– 335, 1971.doi:10.1016/0003-4916(71)90108-4. [KZG+26] Gautam A. Kavuri, Yanbao Zhang, Abigail R. Gookin, Soumyadip Patra, Joshua C. Bienfang, Honghao Fu, Yusuf Alnawakhtha, Dileep V. Reddy, Michael D. Mazurek, Ca...

    work page doi:10.1016/0003-4916(71)90108-4 1971

  21. [21]

    [LL11] Hoi-Kwan Lau and Hoi-Kwong Lo

    URL: https://arxiv.org/abs/2601.16892,arXiv:2601.16892. [LL11] Hoi-Kwan Lau and Hoi-Kwong Lo. Insecurity of position-based quantum-cryptography protocols against entanglement attacks.Physical Review A, 83(1), jan

    arXiv

  22. [22]

    Franke, J

    URL:https://doi.org/10.1103%2Fphysreva.83.012322,doi:10.1103/physreva. 83.012322. [LLQ22] Jiahui Liu, Qipeng Liu, and Luowen Qian. Beating Classical Impossibility of Posi- tion Verification. In Mark Braverman, editor,13th Innovations in Theoretical Com- puter Science Conference (ITCS 2022), volume 215 ofLeibniz International Proceed- ings in Informatics (...

    work page doi:10.1103/physreva 2022

  23. [23]

    URL:https://drops.dagstuhl.de/ opus/volltexte/2022/15696,doi:10.4230/LIPIcs.ITCS.2022.100

    Schloss Dagstuhl – Leibniz-Zentrum für Informatik. URL:https://drops.dagstuhl.de/ opus/volltexte/2022/15696,doi:10.4230/LIPIcs.ITCS.2022.100. 20 [QS15] Bing Qi and George Siopsis. Loss-tolerant position-based quantum cryptography.Phys- ical Review A, 91(4), Apr

    work page doi:10.4230/lipics.itcs.2022.100 2022

  24. [24]

    Holz¨ apfel, T

    URL:http://dx.doi.org/10.1103/PhysRevA.91. 042337,doi:10.1103/physreva.91.042337. [RG15] Jérémy Ribeiro and Frédéric Grosshans. A tight lower bound for the BB84-states quantum-position-verification protocol,

    work page doi:10.1103/physreva.91

  25. [25]

    A Tight Lower Bound for the BB84-states Quantum-Position-Verification Protocol

    URL:https://arxiv.org/abs/1504. 07171,doi:10.48550/ARXIV.1504.07171. [Spe16a] Florian Speelman. Instantaneous non-local computation of low T-depth quantum cir- cuits. In11th Conference on the Theory of Quantum Computation, Communication and Cryptography (TQC 2016). Schloss Dagstuhl-Leibniz-Zentrum fuer Informatik,

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv doi:10.48550/arxiv.1504.07171 2016

  26. [26]

    [Unr14] Dominique Unruh

    URL: http://dx.doi.org/10.1088/1367-2630/15/10/103002,doi:10.1088/1367-2630/ 15/10/103002. [Unr14] Dominique Unruh. Quantum position verification in the random oracle model. In Juan A. Garay and Rosario Gennaro, editors,Advances in Cryptology – CRYPTO 2014, pages 1–18, Berlin, Heidelberg,

    work page doi:10.1088/1367-2630/15/10/103002 2014

  27. [27]

    Coding Theorems of Quantum Information Theory

    Springer Berlin Heidelberg. [Win99] Andreas Winter.Coding theorems of quantum information theory. PhD thesis, Bielefeld University, 1999.doi:10.48550/arXiv.quant-ph/9907077. A Proof of Lemma 4.1 Consider a general strategy as introduced in (14) S=(ρ,{I x c }x,c,{J y c }y,c,{A xyc a }x,y,c,a,{B xyc b }x,y,c,b). We then fix an arbitraryc∈{0,1}m with∣c∣≥k; i...

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv doi:10.48550/arxiv.quant-ph/9907077 1999