Next Article in Journal
Silicon-on-Insulator Optical Buffer Based on Magneto-Optical 1 × 3 Micro-Rings Array Coupled Sagnac Ring
Next Article in Special Issue
One-Pixel Attack for Continuous-Variable Quantum Key Distribution Systems
Previous Article in Journal
Characteristic Study of Non-Line-of-Sight Scattering Ultraviolet Communication System at Small Elevation Angle
Previous Article in Special Issue
Weak Randomness Analysis of Measurement-Device-Independent Quantum Key Distribution with Finite Resources
 
 
Article
Peer-Review Record

Low-Rate Denial-of-Service Attack Detection: Defense Strategy Based on Spectral Estimation for CV-QKD

Photonics 2022, 9(6), 365; https://doi.org/10.3390/photonics9060365
by Enze Dai 1, Duan Huang 2 and Ling Zhang 1,*
Reviewer 1: Anonymous
Reviewer 2: Anonymous
Reviewer 3: Anonymous
Photonics 2022, 9(6), 365; https://doi.org/10.3390/photonics9060365
Submission received: 10 April 2022 / Revised: 13 May 2022 / Accepted: 17 May 2022 / Published: 24 May 2022
(This article belongs to the Special Issue Recent Progress on Quantum Cryptography)

Round 1

Reviewer 1 Report

The practical security is always an important issue for the application of QKD, and many quantum hackings had been proposed and demonstrated. In this paper, by taking advantage of the feature of the PSD of LDos attack, a detection method based on Bartlett spectral estimation approach is analyzed. I think this work is interesting, and can recommend it for publication in Photonics, if the authors can revise their paper according to the comments given in the following.

 

Major comment:

Generally speaking, the QKD system can be divided as two parts, quantum phase and classical phase. Most of previous works about hacking focus on the quantum devices, since this part is the main of the QKD system, and the classical part can be analyzed with the classical method. Obviously, the LDoS attack belongs to the second part. So what is the main different of the LDos attack between the classical key distribution system and the quantum key distribution system? In other words, although the authors propose a method to detect the attack, I guess the classical countermeasure is enough to defeat such attack for the QKD system.

Some minor comments:

  1. In abstract, the first line, the word “absolutely” is not right. In fact, the security of QKD should be expressed as “unconditional security” or “information theoretical security”.
  2. Line 26, the authors claim that the CV QKD has higher key rate than the DV QKD, I strongly think this conclusion is not right. The authors should carefully present their conclusion by review the related papers.
  3. Line 200, the authors claim that “the channel’s key rate- distance product decreased by almost a half”, why? I do not find how such conclusion is obtained.
  4. Line 207, does the results be sensitive to the order of filter (or the parameters of test)? So, why such parameters are chosen for the experiments.

Author Response

Please see the attachment.

Author Response File: Author Response.pdf

Reviewer 2 Report

This paper proposed to detect the low-rate denial-of-service (LDoS) attack based on the spectral estimation of Bartlett approach. They have demonstrated the proposed method can detect the LDoS attack and maintain the consistency of estimation. The manuscript is well-written and can be considered for publicaiton in this journal.

Author Response

Please see the attachment.

Author Response File: Author Response.pdf

Reviewer 3 Report

          Allow me to begin by stating that, in my view, this paper has some very strong points:

          (1)     The organization of the paper is very good, the Figures are meaningful and interesting, and the whole presentation helps the reader to understand and appreciate the aim of the paper. This, combined with the references, can convince the reader that the author knows this area and has a good indication where the research should lead.

          (2)     The other noteworthy remark is the excellent formatting and typesetting of all the figures that have enabled me to read and understand the arguments.

          The only remark I have to make is that personally I have found the technicalities in their proofs and formulas difficult to follow. As far as I can tell they seem correct, but, to be honest, I am 100% sure.

          Their command of the English language is also very adequate.

          In conclusion, this work is quite interesting, well written, illustrated and presented, and I believe that this paper deserves publication in its current form.

Author Response

Please see the attachment.

Author Response File: Author Response.pdf

Back to TopTop