Cao, H. & Ma, W. Multi-party quantum key agreement based on quantum search algorithm. Sci. reports 7, 45046 (2017). Many key exchange systems allow one party to generate the key and send that key simply to the other party – the other party has no influence on the key. Using a key-agreement protocol avoids some key distribution issues related to these systems. Below we analyze the collusive attack. The worst part is that only one participant is honest and everyone is dishonest. Take for example three participants P1, P2 and P3, where P1 and P3 are dishonest. They want to pre-order the last key of P2.
The detailed attack strategies are as follows. P1 prepares Bell states and sends the photon sequence | BS21?2 to P2. After P2 completes its operations on the photonic sequence, | BS21?2 and sends the sequence | BS21?3 for P3, P1, and P3 only measure Bell states at step (5) in which each participant publishes their additional control sequences. After P2 has received the RH21 command sequence from P2, P1 and P3 can deduce the secret key K2 from P2. However, the only method for P1 and P3 to determine the final key of P2 is to announce false command sequences. Based on the analysis of the attack strategy of the first participant, we can conclude the probability that he will pass the security check and that the last key of P2 is close to 0. Therefore, dishonest participants cannot determine the final key. In summary, our proposed protocol can withstand the attacks of the participants. Wang, S., Xu, G.B., Liang, X. Q. &Wu, Y.
L. Multiparty Quantum Key Agreement with 4 qubits-symmetric w-state. Int. J. Theor. 57, 3716–3726 (2018). In this article, we find that some existing MQKA protocols in travel mode are generally sensitive to internal dishonest participants. We also find the problem of information leaks in the MQKA cad-ma protocol. Next, we take the MQKA Cao-Ma protocols as examples to illustrate these attacks in detail. To resist attacks, we offer a robust MQKA protocol in travel mode based on non-orthogonal bell states. Analyses show that our protocol can withstand both external attacks and participants and achieve greater efficiency.
Finally, we design an optical platform for each participant and show that our proposed protocol can be achieved with feasible technologies.. . . .
What if a confidentiality agreement went too far? What happens if the text of a confidentiality agreement is broad enough that it is a de facto non-competition clause? In this case, would the usual compliance with confidentiality agreements apply? So what`s the lesson? An undisclosed publication by a staff member after the event must be based on a new reflection to be applicable. As part of the signing of the new agreement, employers must provide new cash, benefits, confidential information or other consideration. Reliance on a previously granted “job retention” or other benefit is unlikely to be sufficient for the courts to find the confidentiality agreement enforceable. Whether you`re talking to a potential buyer of your business, an interested investor, or a joint venture partner before sharing confidential information with that person, they need to establish a confidentiality agreement, often referred to as an “NDA.” NDAs are very popular and come in a variety of shapes and lengths. Their main purpose is to protect the confidentiality of information shared with an outsider of the company. The lack of a signed enforceable NDA can cause serious headaches if information that should be confidential falls into the wrong hands. In my experience, these are the most common mistakes made by companies in confidentiality agreements: therefore, if an employer wishes to maintain their right to damages for breach of a confidentiality agreement, they should ensure that the agreement is appropriate from the outset. The employer does not want the court to have to reform its alliances because they are too broad. Given nClosures` view that a certification body is not applicable, unless additional safeguards are taken and the lack of case law on the interpretation of TUTSA in Texas, companies wishing to rely on the applicability of a certification body should do more than enter into such an agreement. Prudence requires that beyond the implementation of a certification body, companies take positive protective measures (as stated above in nClosures) in order to preserve the confidentiality of this information, in order to strengthen the applicability of this certification body. As mentioned above, the law is rarely black and white.
In this context, it is always important to consult a lawyer about your options regarding these agreements. Contact me, a Texas labor attorney to verify your competition or confidentiality agreement. In the area of competition and confidentiality agreements, “more” is not always better. Employers are encouraged to make reasonable agreements so that the court does not have to reform them. If a court has to reform an overly broad alliance, it may lead to the worker being exempted from it from an injustice that occurred before the Reformation. . . .
Sometimes the verb comes before the subject. However, the same rules continue to apply to the chord: the underlined part of the sentence contains a verb error with “runs”. “John and Susan”, while the two singular nouns are a plural and need a plural form instead of the singular “Runs”. “Run to the Finish line” is the right choice of answer. This sentence contains an error in the subject-verb concordance. The theme of the sentence is “reports”, so the verb “a” must be changed to the plural “have” to be consistent with the plural theme “relations”. Bob is a singular noun of the third person, and therefore the verb (Drives) is singular. This harmony between the subject and the verb is called concordance. Being able to find the right subject and verb will help you correct subject-verb chord errors. When searching for a chord, especially focus on the indeterminate pronouns in the last column. The following examples show how these pronouns can be singular or plural: rule 1. A topic will come before a sentence that will begin with.
This is a key rule for understanding topics. The word of the is the culprit of many errors, perhaps most of the errors of subject and verb. Stormy authors, speakers, readers, and listeners might ignore the all-too-common error in the following sentence: Shouldn`t Joe be followed by what, not were, since Joe is singular? But Joe isn`t really there, so let`s say we weren`t there. The sentence demonstrates the subjunctive mind used to express hypothetical, desiring, imaginary, or objectively contradictory things. The subjunctive connects singular subjects to what we usually think of as a plural rush. 4. Finally, some names borrowed from Latin and Greek, which end in a, are considered plural: the same rule applies to words like minority and majority. Every night for five consecutive nights was well below freezing. Over the past few years, the SAT test service has not judged any of you to be strictly singular. According to merriam-Webster`s Dictionary of English Usage: “Obviously, since English, no singular and plural is and remains.
The idea that it is only singular is a myth of unknown origin that seems to have emerged in the nineteenth century. If it appears to you as a singular in the context, use a singular; If it appears as a plural, use a plural. Both are acceptable beyond serious criticism. If none of them clearly means “not one,” a singular verb follows. In such cases, we are talking about the different members of the group. .