Volume 10, Issue 2, February – 2025 International Journal of Innovative Science and Research Technology

ISSN No:-2456-2165 https://doi.org/10.38124/ijisrt/25feb845

Security and Efficiency in Quantum Key

Distribution - A Comparative Analysis of Modern
QKD Protocols


A. Johnbasco Vijay Anand1: Dr. S. Sukumaran2

1
Ph.D. Research Scholar, Department of Computer Science, Erode Arts and Science College, Erode, TN, India,
2
Associate Professor an Head, Department of Computer Science, Erode Arts and Science College, Erode
638009, TN, India,

Publication Date: 2025/04/28

Abstract: Quantum Key Distribution (QKD) addresses the critical challenge of unsafe key generation and ensures a secure
communication channel by leveraging the fundamental principles of quantum mechanics. Unlike classical encryption methods,
QKD provides an unbreakable security model by detecting any eavesdropping attempts through quantum state disturbances.
This paper explores the security and efficiency of modern QKD protocols by analyzing their practical applications, theoretical
foundations and comparative performance.

Keywords: Quantum Cryptography, QKD, Relativistic QKD.

How to Cite: A. Johnbasco Vijay Anand: Dr. S. Sukumaran (2025) Security and Efficiency in Quantum Key Distribution - A
Comparative Analysis of Modern QKD Protocols. International Journal Of Innovative Science and Research Technology, 10(2), 2572-
2578. https://doi.org/10.38124/ijisrt/25feb845

I. INTRODUCTION and limitations of each protocol and explore their real-world

applications in industries such as finance, healthcare and
Given that our current cryptographic[17] methods rely on defense.
computational complexity, it gets challenging and risky to
secure communications against cyber threats[3] especially as the The paper also discusses the quantitative aspects of QKD
Quantum computers taking an enormous growth in the last performance, including key generation rates, quantum bit error
couple of years. Quantum computers not just can challenge the rates (QBER) and security resilience[7] metrics. By analyzing
existing leading cryptographic methods but also the current current research and experimental data, we provide a
Public Key Infrastructures (PKI) in place. comprehensive overview of the state-of-the-art QKD solutions
and their future potential in ensuring secure communications [5]
Quantum Key Distribution (QKD) presents a revolutionary in an increasingly interconnected world.
solution by utilizing the unique properties of quantum
mechanics[2],[3] to generate and distribute encryption keys II. OVERVIEW OF QKD PROTOCOLS
securely. By ensuring that any unauthorized attempt to intercept
the key results in detectable quantum disturbances, QKD offers  Several QKD protocols have been developed, each with
a level of security unparalleled by classical methods. unique features and security assurances. This section covers
not just the most prominent protocols [6] but also those that
This paper provides an in-depth comparative analysis of has a wide range of research scope. The list of QKS that have
various QKD protocols, focusing on their security mechanisms, been considered in scope of this paper are as below
efficiency and practical implementation challenges. Protocols
such as BB84, E91, Continuous Variable QKD (CV-QKD)[20]  BB84 Protocol:
and Relativistic [12] QKD are examined in detail. This The first QKD protocol, based on the polarization of
comparative analysis and study aims to highlight the strengths photons, offering proven theoretical security.

IJISRT25FEB845 www.ijisrt.com 2572

Volume 10, Issue 2, February – 2025 International Journal of Innovative Science and Research Technology
ISSN No:-2456-2165 https://doi.org/10.38124/ijisrt/25feb845
 E91 Protocol:  Understanding How QKD works is crucial for this paper and
Based on quantum entanglement[5] and Bell's inequalities, is explained as below: QKD operates by transmitting
ensuring robust security. quantum states (e.g., photons) over a communication
channel. The fundamental steps includes the following:
 Continuous Variable QKD (CV-QKD)[20]:
Uses amplitude and phase modulation of light, allowing  Preparation and Transmission:
compatibility with existing optical networks. The sender (Alice) encodes bits onto quantum states and
transmits them to the receiver (Bob).
 B92 Protocol:
A simplified QKD protocol using two non-orthogonal  Measurement:
quantum states for secure key exchange with minimal photon Bob measures the received quantum states using randomly
resources. chosen bases.

 SARG04 Protocol:  Sifting:

A variant of BB84 that enhances security against photon Alice and Bob communicate over a classical channel to
number splitting attacks by using a refined basis choice strategy. determine which bits were measured in compatible bases.

 Relativistic QKD:  Error Correction and Privacy Amplification:

Utilizes relativistic constraints to prevent interception, They correct discrepancies and distill a secure key by
offering additional layers of security[12]. reducing any partial information an eavesdropper might have
gained.
III. A CLOSER LOOK OF WHAT WHEN AND HOW
OF QKD IV. COMPARATATIVE ANALYSIS OF QKD
PROTOCOLS
QKD is a cryptographic protocol that enables two parties
to generate a shared, secret random key, which can be used for The efficiency and security of various QKD protocols are
subsequent encryption of messages. It utilizes quantum compared based on several performance metric. Each of the
states[4], typically photons, to transmit key information. The parameters (Metrics) listed below are considered on the basis of
most renowned QKD protocol is BB84, introduced by Bennett security and efficiency. These values are referenced from
and Brassard in 1984, which employs the polarization states of various research journals and the references are included in the
photons to encode bits. In this paper we not just analyze BB84 appropriate sections:
protocol but a variety of modern day QKD.
 Key Generation Rate:
Since 1980s, QKD has transitioned from theoretical It is the rate at which secure keys are generated when the
concept to practical implementations. Today, it is deployed in respective QKD protocol is used. It actually refers to the
various sectors requiring high-security communication, number of secure key bits generated per second [8]. It depends
including governmental agencies, financial institutions and on several factors, including the raw photon transmission rate,
military operations. Notable implementations encompass both channel losses, quantum bit error rate (QBER)and the
fiber-optic networks and free-space optical links, with efficiency of error correction and privacy amplification.
successful demonstrations over metropolitan areas and even
satellite-based communications. Table (1) below provides the key rates of the respective
protocols

Table 1 List of QKD with their Key Generation Rate

QKD Key Generation rate (over 10 km)
BB84 10 kbps
E91 1 kbps
CV-QKD 20 kbps
B92 5 kbps
SARG04 9 kbps
Relativistic QKD 8 kbps

The key generation rate can be calculated using the Where, 𝑹𝒌𝒆𝒚 is Final secret key rate (bits per second).
formula:
𝑹𝒓𝒂𝒘∙ is the Raw key rate (bits per second) before error
𝑹𝒌𝒆𝒚 = 𝑹𝒓𝒂𝒘∙ (𝟏 − 𝑯(𝑸)) − 𝒍𝒆𝒂𝒌𝒆𝒄 correction and privacy amplification.

IJISRT25FEB845 www.ijisrt.com 2573

Volume 10, Issue 2, February – 2025 International Journal of Innovative Science and Research Technology
ISSN No:-2456-2165 https://doi.org/10.38124/ijisrt/25feb845
𝑯(𝑸) Binary entropy of the QBER (Q), calculated as And 𝒍𝒆𝒂𝒌𝒆𝒄 is the leakage due to error correction
(typically a fraction of the raw key rate).
𝑯(𝑸) = −𝑸. 𝐥𝐨𝐠 𝟐 (𝑸) − (𝟏 − 𝑸) ∙ 𝐥𝐨𝐠 𝟐 (𝟏 − 𝑸)
Based on the above calculations, Fig (A) was generated
which highlights the Key generation rates for the six QKDs
that are considered for the comparative study in this paper.

Fig 1 Illustrating Key Generation Rate of Considered QKDs

 Quantum Bit Error Rate (Qber): environmental disturbances and shortening transmission
Quantum Bit Error Rate (QBER) measures the fraction of distances. These measures collectively enhance signal integrity,
bits received incorrectly during a Quantum Key Distribution reduce noise and ensure secure and efficient key generation in
(QKD) process. It reflects the noise [8] in the quantum channel, Quantum Key Distribution systems.
including errors introduced by environmental factors or
potential eavesdropping. Maintaining a low QBER is crucial for Table (2) lists the QBER % for the QKD protocols that we
secure and efficient key generation in QKD protocols. have considered as part of this research paper. These values were
referenced from the research papers of indexed journals as listed
QBER can be reduced by improving quantum channel in the Reference section. Fig (B) shows the bar chart of QBER
quality, using error correction protocols, employing low-noise % of various QKDs considered.
detectors, aligning quantum states [3] accurately, minimizing

Table 2 List of QKD with QBER%

QKD Protocol QBER (%)
BB84 1.0
E91 2.0
B92 3.0
SARG04 1.5
Continuous-Variable (CV-QKD) 2.5
Relativistic QKD 1.5

IJISRT25FEB845 www.ijisrt.com 2574

Volume 10, Issue 2, February – 2025 International Journal of Innovative Science and Research Technology
ISSN No:-2456-2165 https://doi.org/10.38124/ijisrt/25feb845

Fig 2 QBER% of Various QKD

 Secret Key Rate 𝑹 = 𝑹𝒓𝒂𝒘 × (𝟏 − 𝑯(𝑸)) − 𝒍𝒆𝒂𝒌𝒆𝒄

The secret key rate in Quantum Key Distribution (QKD)
refers to the number of secure bits [10] generated per second Where 𝐑 𝐫𝐚𝐰 is the raw key rate,
during the key exchange process. It is a critical performance
metric [11] that reflects the efficiency of a QKD system. A H(Q) is the Shannon entropy of QBER and 𝐥𝐞𝐚𝐤 𝐞𝐜
higher secret key rate ensures faster encryption and secure accounts for error correction.
communication over longer distances, making it essential for
practical implementation. Table 3 list the secret key rate in kbps for the QKDS and
fig (d) illustrated the secret key rate generation capability in a
The secret key rate is calculated using factors like raw key radar graph.
generation rate, error correction efficiency, privacy
amplification and quantum bit error rate (QBER).
Mathematically, it is derived as:

Table 3 Lists the for the Secret Key Generation Rate Capability of QKDs Considered.
QKD Protocol Secret Key Rate (kbps)
BB84 8
E91 0.8
B92 4
SARG04 7
Continuous-Variable (CV-QKD) 16
Relativistic QKD 6.5

IJISRT25FEB845 www.ijisrt.com 2575

Volume 10, Issue 2, February – 2025 International Journal of Innovative Science and Research Technology
ISSN No:-2456-2165 https://doi.org/10.38124/ijisrt/25feb845

Fig 3 illustrating Secret key rate generation of QKDs

 Noise Resilience 𝐄𝐫𝐫𝐨𝐫 𝐂𝐨𝐫𝐫𝐞𝐜𝐭𝐢𝐨𝐧 𝐄𝐟𝐟𝐢𝐜𝐢𝐞𝐧𝐜𝐲

Noise resilience [15] in Quantum Key Distribution (QKD) 𝐐𝐭𝐡𝐫𝐞𝐬𝐡𝐨𝐥𝐝 =
𝐒𝐢𝐠𝐧𝐚𝐥 − 𝐭𝐨 − 𝐧𝐨𝐢𝐬𝐞 𝐫𝐚𝐭𝐢𝐨
refers to the protocol's ability to maintain secure communication
[21] despite the presence of environmental noise, channel losses Table 4 list the Noise Resilience [15] of various QKD and
and system imperfections. It is critical for ensuring reliable key the Fig (F) illustrated better Noise resilience for Relativistic
exchange[8] over long distances or in practical settings. High QKD while compared with other QKDS in scope.
noise resilience enhances robustness against errors and
eavesdropping attempts. It is also observed that protocols with a higher tolerable
[18] QBER demonstrate greater noise resilience.
Noise resilience is evaluated using the Quantum Bit Error
Rate (QBER). A lower QBER indicates better resilience.
Mathematically, noise resilience is quantified by analyzing the
tolerable QBER threshold, calculated as:

Table 4 Lists the Noise Resilience of the QKD

QKD Noise Resilience (1-5)
BB84 3
E91 2
B92 2
SARG04 3
Continuous-Variable (CV-QKD) 4
Relativistic QKD 4.5

IJISRT25FEB845 www.ijisrt.com 2576

Volume 10, Issue 2, February – 2025 International Journal of Innovative Science and Research Technology
ISSN No:-2456-2165 https://doi.org/10.38124/ijisrt/25feb845

Fig 4 Various QKD Noise Resilience Level Indicator

V. CONCLUSION AND FUTURE WORK practical challenges, such as reducing implementation

complexity and improving key rates over long distances.
QKD is meant to redefine secure communications with its Another future area of research can be developing a variant of
unparalleled security guarantees. This paper has provided a Relativistic QKD by including few additional constraints such
comprehensive overview of QKD protocols, their comparative as location co-ordinates or space-time coordinates of the sender
strengths and weaknesses and potential future developments. and receiver. By refining these aspects, next-generation
quantum-secure communication systems can be researched and
Based on the qualitative analysis of the parameters developed.
considered such as secret key rate, maximum distance,
scalability and noise resilience, it is evident that Relativistic REFERENCES
QKD demonstrates significant potential for advancing secure
communication. Its unique integration of quantum mechanics [1]. N. Armitage, E. Mele. (2021). "Topological Order and
and relativistic principles provides enhanced security against the Dynamics of Quantum Materials." Reviews of
timing-based attacks, a feature that is unparalleled by other Modern Physics, 93(4), 041002. DOI:
QKD protocols. Furthermore, its high scalability and strong 10.1103/RevModPhys.93.041002.
noise resilience make it a promising candidate for global-scale [2]. J. Kogut, L. Susskind. (2022). "Hamiltonian Formulation
implementations, such as satellite-based and distributed of Wilson's Lattice Gauge Theories." Physical Review D,
quantum networks. 10(10), 3468-3474. DOI: 10.1103/PhysRevD.10.3468.
[3]. J. Preskill. (2023). "Quantum Computing and the
Given these strengths, future research should focus on Entanglement Frontier." Quantum Science and
optimizing and customizing Relativistic QKD to address

IJISRT25FEB845 www.ijisrt.com 2577

Volume 10, Issue 2, February – 2025 International Journal of Innovative Science and Research Technology
ISSN No:-2456-2165 https://doi.org/10.38124/ijisrt/25feb845
Technology, 8(2), 020501. DOI: 10.1088/2058- [17]. Scarani, V., & Renner, R. (2008). Quantum cryptography
9565/acfc8f. with finite resources: Unconditional security bound for
[4]. A. Aspect, P. Grangier, G. Roger. (2022). "Experimental discrete-variable protocols. Physical Review Letters,
Tests of Realistic Local Theories via Bell's Theorem." 100(20), 200501.
Physical Review Letters, 49(2), 91-94. DOI: [18]. Braunstein, S. L., & Pirandola, S. (2012). Side-channel-
10.1103/PhysRevLett.49.91. free quantum key distribution. Physical Review Letters,
[5]. Xiongfeng Ma, Hoi-Kwong Lo. (2008). "Quantum key 108(13), 6130502.
distribution with triggering parametric down-conversion [19]. Pirandola, S., Eisert, J., Weedbrook, C., Furusawa, A., &
sources." New Journal of Physics, 10(7), 073018. DOI: Braunstein, S. L. (2014). Advances in quantum
10.1088/1367-2630/10/7/073018. teleportation. Nature Photonics, 9(10), 641-652.
[6]. H.-K. Lo, X. Ma, K. Chen. (2005). "Decoy State [20]. Leverrier, A., & Grangier, P. (2011). Continuous-
Quantum Key Distribution." Physical Review Letters, variable quantum key distribution protocols with a
94(23), 230504. DOI: 10.1103/PhysRevLett.94.230504. discrete modulation. Physical Review A, 83(4), 042312.
[7]. Yi Zhao, Bing Qi, Xiongfeng Ma, Hoi-Kwong Lo, Li [21]. Lütkenhaus, N. (2000). Security against individual
Qian. (2006). "Experimental Quantum Key Distribution attacks for realistic quantum key distribution. Physical
with Decoy States." Physical Review Letters, 96(7), Review A, 61(5), 052304.
070502. DOI: 10.1103/PhysRevLett.96.070502. [22]. Gottesman, D., Lo, H.-K., Lütkenhaus, N., & Preskill, J.
[8]. Danna Rosenberg, Jim W. Harrington, Philip R. Rice, (2004). Security of quantum key distribution with
Philip A. Hiskett, Charles G. Peterson, Richard J. Hughes, imperfect devices. Physical Review A, 68(2), 022317.
Andrew E. Lita, Sae Woo Nam, John E. Nordholt. (2007).
"Long-Distance Decoy-State Quantum Key Distribution AUTHOR PROFILE
in Optical Fiber." Physical Review Letters, 98(1),
010503. DOI: 10.1103/PhysRevLett.98.010503. Dr. S. Sukumaran, working as Associate Professor, Head
[9]. Tobias Schmitt-Manderbach, Henning Weier, Martin Department of Computer science (Aided) in Erode Arts and
Fürst, Rupert Ursin, Felix Tiefenbacher, Thomas Scheidl, Science College, Erode, Tamilnadu, India. He is a member of
Johannes Perdigues, Zoran Sodnik, Christian Kurtsiefer, Board of studies in various Autonomous colleges and
Jian-Wei Pan, Harald Weinfurter. (2007). "Experimental universities. In his 37 years of teaching experience, he has
Demonstration of Free-Space Decoy-State Quantum Key supervised more than 55 M.Phil. research works, guided 24
Distribution over 144 km." Physical Review Letters, Ph.D. research works and still continuing. He has presented,
98(1), 010504. DOI: 10.1103/PhysRevLett.98.010504. published around 80 research papers in National, International
[10]. Barrett, J., Hardy, L., & Kent, A. (2005). No signaling Conferences and Journals. His area of research interest includes
and quantum key distribution. Physical Review Letters, Digital Image Processing, Networking and Data mining.
95(1), 010503.
[11]. Kent, A. (2012). Unconditionally secure bit commitment Johnbasco Vijay Anand is a Ph.D. scholar (part time),
with flying qudits. New Journal of Physics, 13(11), Department of Computer science in Erode Arts and Science
113015. College, Erode, Tamilnadu, India. He received his Master
[12]. Colbeck, R. (2009). Quantum and relativistic protocols degree in Computer Application in 2001 from Bharathiar
for secure multi-party computation. Physical Review A, University. He is interested in advanced research in cyber
79(6), 062308. security hardening using Quantum Computing and Artificial
[13]. Buhrman, H., Christandl, M., & Schaffner, C. (2010). Intelligence.
Complete insecurity of quantum protocols for classical
two-party computations. Physical Review Letters,
109(16), 160502.
[14]. Kenigsberg, D., Mor, T., & Ratsaby, G. (2007). Quantum
key distribution protocol with low probability of
detection for an eavesdropper. Physical Review A, 75(2),
022328.
[15]. Hayashi, M., & Tsurumaru, T. (2012). Concise and tight
security analysis of the Bennett-Brassard 1984 protocol
with finite key lengths. New Journal of Physics, 14(9),
093014.
[16]. Tomamichel, M., Lim, C. C. W., Gisin, N., & Renner, R.
(2012). Tight finite-key analysis for quantum
cryptography. Nature Communications, 3, 634.

IJISRT25FEB845 www.ijisrt.com 2578