# Web 3.0 and Quantum Security: Long-Distance Free-Space QSDC for Global Web
3.0 Networks††thanks: These authors contributed equally: Yew Kee Wong, *Yifan
Zhou, Xinlin Zhou, Yan Shing Liang, and Zi Yan Li

Yew Kee Wong*
Hong Kong Chu Hai College
Hong Kong, China
<EMAIL_ADDRESS>Yifan Zhou*
BASIS International School Guangzhou
Guangzhou, China
<EMAIL_ADDRESS>Xinlin Zhou*
BASIS International School Guangzhou
Guangzhou, China
<EMAIL_ADDRESS>Yan Shing Liang  BASIS International
School Guangzhou
Guangzhou, China
<EMAIL_ADDRESS>Zi Yan Li  BASIS International School
Guangzhou
Guangzhou, China
<EMAIL_ADDRESS>
###### Abstract

With the advent of Web 3.0, the swift advancement of technology confronts an
imminent threat from quantum computing. Security protocols safeguarding the
integrity of Web 2.0 and Web 3.0 are growing more susceptible to both quantum
attacks and sophisticated classical threats. The article introduces our novel
long-distance free-space quantum secure direct communication (LF QSDC) as a
method to safeguard against security breaches in both quantum and classical
contexts. Differing from techniques like quantum key distribution (QKD), LF
QSDC surpasses constraints by facilitating encrypted data transmission sans
key exchanges, thus diminishing the inherent weaknesses of key-based systems.
The distinctiveness of this attribute, coupled with its quantum mechanics
base, protects against quantum computer assaults and advanced non-quantum
dangers, harmonizing seamlessly with the untrustworthy tenets of the Web 3.0
age. The focus of our study is the technical design and incorporation of LF
QSDC into web 3.0 network infrastructures, highlighting its efficacy for
extended-range communication. LF QSDC is based on the memory DL04 protocol and
enhanced with our novel Quantum-Aware Low-Density Parity Check (LDPC),
Pointing, Acquisition, and Tracking (PAT) technologies, and Atmospheric
Quantum Correction Algorithm (AQCA). Utilizing this method not only bolsters
the security of worldwide Web 3.0 networks but also guarantees their endurance
in a time when quantum and sophisticated classical threats exist
simultaneously. Consequently, LF QSDC stands out as a robust security
solution, well-suited for Web 3.0 systems amidst the constantly evolving
digital environment.

###### Index Terms:

Quantum Cryptography, Web 3.0, Quantum Secure Direct Communication, Long-
Distance Free-Space Quantum Secure Direct Communication, Quantum Security

##  I Introduction

The advent of Web 3.0 has dramatically transformed internet usage and
application interaction, characterized by a decentralized, distributed, and
user-centric approach. This paradigm shift empowers users with unprecedented
control over their data, identity, and privacy. In the context of our
globalized digital ecosystem, securing these networks is crucial, given the
varied reliability and risk profiles across nodes and users. Traditional
security mechanisms, including public key encryption and digital signatures,
play a pivotal role in ensuring the confidentiality, integrity, and
authenticity of network transactions and data. However, the emergence of
quantum computing, leveraging principles of quantum mechanics, presents a
formidable challenge to these cryptographic defenses, threatening to
compromise data integrity by breaking current encryption methods [1, 2].

TABLE I: Comparison of Types of Quantum Secure Communication Protocols Category | Type of Protocol
---|---
|  LF QSDC |  DL04 Protocol |  Memory-Free DL04 |  QKD
Communication Distance |  Long-distance (intercontinental) |  Moderate distance |  Moderate distance |  Short to moderate distance
Security Level |  High (no key exchange required) |  High (key exchange involved) |  High (no key exchange involved) |  Very high (key exchange fundamental)
Implementation Complexity |  Moderate (enhanced by PAT technologies) |  High (requires quantum memory) |  Moderate (no quantum memory required) |  High (requires sophisticated setup)
Suitability for Globalized Web 3.0 |  Highly suitable |  Moderately suitable |  Moderately suitable |  Less suitable for global scale
Atmospheric Disturbances Resistance |  Strong (mitigated by adaptive optics) |  Moderate (susceptible to some atmospheric effects) |  Moderate (susceptible to some atmospheric effects) |  Weak (highly susceptible to atmospheric effects)

The advent of the Web 3.0 period has led to major transformations in our
engagement with the Internet and its various applications. The essence of Web
3.0 lies in its decentralized, distributed, and user-centric structure,
empowering users to manage their data, identity, and privacy. This scenario
also paves the way for diverse economic interactions, encompassing direct peer
transactions, intelligent transactions, and digital assets.

Nevertheless, the practical application of quantum communication, particularly
in long-distance free-space contexts, faces significant hurdles that must be
overcome to fully realize the globalization of Web 3.0 networks. Current
quantum communication techniques such as QKD are unable to achieve secure
satellite-based long-distance direct data transmission [11, 12, 13, 14]. This
research proposes a novel protocol, LF QSDC, aimed at addressing these
challenges. LF QSDC is based on memory-free DL04 protocol [15] and
incorporates our novel lossless transmission system which includes a Quantum-
Aware LDPC coding scheme, PAT technologies, and AQCA.

The memory-free DL04 protocol which FL QSDC employs reduces the complexity of
quantum state storage and management, making the system more practical and
robust for real-world applications [15] as shown in Table I. Our novel
1uantum-aware LDPC coding scheme, PAT technologies, and AQCA mitigate issues
related to atmospheric turbulence and alignment errors, which are prominent in
satellite-based free-space quantum communication [16, 17, 18, 19].

This paper delves into a strategy for incorporating LF QSDC into Web 3.0
frameworks to combat quantum dangers, in harmony with the decentralized nature
of Web 3.0. Integrating LF QSDC technically with Web 3.0 demands an innovative
method. It’s necessary to modify Web 3.0 protocols to integrate LF QSDC’s
direct transmission features. This demands progress in quantum communication
technologies and the evolution of Web 3.0 architecture to facilitate such
integration.

The main contributions of this article are summarized as follows:

  1. 1.

Introduction of a novel LF QSDC system designed for Web 3.0 networks.

  2. 2.

Introduction of a detailed and practical road map to the implementation of LF
QSDC into global communication networks.

  3. 3.

Development and optimization of a quantum-aware LDPC and PAT technology to
enhance quantum communication reliability and efficiency.

  4. 4.

Proposal of a novel AQCA aimed at mitigating atmospheric disturbances and
improving security over long distances satellite communication.

We will first give an overview of our proposed LF QSDC system. Then, we will
detail our innovative designs of quantum-aware LDPC, PAT technologies, and
atmospheric quantum correction algorithms. Finally, we will present our
implementation plan for the LF QSDC and discuss the implications of our
findings for global communication networks.

##  II Long-Distance Free-Space QSDC Overview

This section introduces long-distance free-space quan- tum secure direct
communication (QSDC). Our investi- gation delves into how advanced
technologies can sur- mount existing constraints, rendering QSDC viable for
widespread application both in the open air and across space through satellite
communication.

The process initiates by setting up the quantum state, marking the first phase
in encoding quantum information for transmission. Following this, the process
involves applying LDPC coding to enhance error correction capabilities,
crucial for maintaining the integrity of quantum data over long distances. PAT
technologies are integrated to ensure precise alignment and stabilization of
the quantum signal. An atmospheric correction step is then applied to mitigate
effects like scattering and absorption that can degrade the quantum signal as
it traverses the atmosphere. The corrected signal undergoes transmission,
sending it across free space, potentially covering vast distances including
satellite-to-ground communication paths. Upon reaching the destination, the
quantum signal is measured in a critical phase where the encoded quantum
information is detected and interpreted. Finally, the process concludes with
information decoding, where the quantum data is translated back into classical
information for use.

Figure 1 shows the overview of LF QSDC:

Start$\Psi_{\text{prep}}$$\text{LDPC}_{\text{quantum}}$PAT
IntegrationAtmospheric CorrectionTransmissionMeasurementInformation
DecodingEnd Figure 1: Flowchart showing the overview of FL QSDC

###  II-A State Preparation

The sender, Alice, prepares a sequence of single photons in one of the four
time-bin states:

$\begin{split}|T_{0}\rangle=|0\rangle,\quad|T_{1}\rangle&=|1\rangle,\quad|T_{2}\rangle=\frac{1}{\sqrt{2}}(|0\rangle+|1\rangle),\\\
\quad|T_{3}\rangle&=\frac{1}{\sqrt{2}}(|0\rangle-|1\rangle),\end{split}$ (1)

where $|0\rangle$ and $|1\rangle$ denote the early and late time bins,
respectively [7]. Alice randomly chooses two bits, $a_{0}$ and $a_{1}$, to
encode each photon. The encoding rule is as follows [20]:

$(a_{0},a_{1})\rightarrow\left\\{\begin{array}[]{ll}|T_{0}\rangle,&\text{if
}(a_{0},a_{1})=(0,0),\\\ |T_{1}\rangle,&\text{if }(a_{0},a_{1})=(0,1),\\\
|T_{2}\rangle,&\text{if }(a_{0},a_{1})=(1,0),\\\ |T_{3}\rangle,&\text{if
}(a_{0},a_{1})=(1,1).\end{array}\right.$ (2)

Alice also randomly chooses another bit, $a_{2}$, to determine the phase of
each photon. The phase modulation rule is as follows [11]:

$a_{2}\rightarrow\left\\{\begin{array}[]{ll}\phi=0,&\text{if }a_{2}=0,\\\
\phi=\pi,&\text{if }a_{2}=1.\end{array}\right.$ (3)

Alice applies a phase modulator (PM) to each photon according to the value of
$a_{2}$. The PM shifts the phase of the late time bin by $\phi$, resulting in
the following four phase states [11]:

$\begin{split}|P_{0}\rangle=|0\rangle,\quad|P_{1}\rangle&=|1\rangle,\quad|P_{2}\rangle=\frac{1}{\sqrt{2}}(|0\rangle+e^{i\phi}|1\rangle),\\\
\quad|P_{3}\rangle&=\frac{1}{\sqrt{2}}(|0\rangle-e^{i\phi}|1\rangle).\end{split}$
(4)

The phase states are related to the time-bin states by the following
transformation [13]:

$|P_{i}\rangle=\frac{1}{\sqrt{2}}(|T_{i}\rangle+e^{i\phi}|T_{i\oplus
2}\rangle),$ (5)

where $\oplus$ denotes addition modulo 4. Alice records the values of $a_{0}$,
$a_{1}$, and $a_{2}$ for each photon, and sends the photons to the receiver,
Bob, through a free-space channel.

###  II-B State Transmission

Photons traverse the free-space passage, leading to a range of disruptions
including atmospheric disturbances, beam drift, scintillation, and ambient
noise. Such disruptions impact the consistency and accuracy of quantum states,
potentially leading to inaccuracies or losses in transmission. LF QSDC tackles
these obstacles by utilizing a quantum-aware LDPC coding system, merging PAT
technologies, and integrating an atmospheric quantum correction algorithm:

  1. 1.

Quantum-Aware LDPC: The LDPC coding system plays a pivotal role in correcting
errors inherent in quantum communication. This system is crucial for ensuring
the integrity of each transaction in the Web 3.0 era[16].

  2. 2.

PAT Technologies: PAT technologies align quantum signals and maintain a stable
communication link, ensuring the continuous operation of decentralized Web 3.0
networks [17].

  3. 3.

Atmospheric Quantum Correction Algorithms: These algorithms address
disturbances like turbulence to ensure the reliability of long-distance
transmissions crucial for global Web 3.0 networks [6].

This combination of schemes and algorithms ensures a secure, reliable, and
efficient quantum communication system, adhering to the requirements of the
Web 3.0 era.

###  II-C State Measurement

Bob receives the photons from Alice and measures them using an interferometer
and a single-photon detector (SPD). The interferometer consists of a beam
splitter (BS), two PMs, and two mirrors (M). The BS splits each photon into
two paths, corresponding to the early and late time bins. The PMs shift the
phases of the two paths by $\theta$ and $\theta+\pi$, respectively. The
mirrors reflect the photons to the BS, where they recombine and interfere. The
SPD detects the photons at the output port of the BS.

The measurement outcome depends on the phase state of the photon and the phase
difference $\theta$ between the two paths. Then, Bob randomly chooses the
value of $\theta$ for each photon and records the detection results. Bob then
announces the values of $\theta$ publicly and discards the results that
correspond to $\theta=\frac{\pi}{4}$ or $\theta=\frac{3\pi}{4}$, since these
values do not provide any information about the phase of the photon.

###  II-D Information Extraction

Alice and Bob extract the information from the transmitted and measured
photons, using the following steps:

  1. 1.

Alice and Bob perform sifting, where they compare the values of $a_{2}$ and
$\theta$, and keep only the results that satisfy $a_{2}\oplus\theta=0$ or
$a_{2}\oplus\theta=1$. This ensures that Bob’s measurement basis is aligned
with Alice’s encoding basis and that the phase information is preserved [7].

  2. 2.

Alice and Bob perform error correction, where they apply the error-correcting
codes to correct the bit errors and phase errors in the sifted data. They also
perform privacy amplification, applying a hash function to reduce the
information leakage to Eve [22].

  3. 3.

Alice and Bob perform information reconciliation, where they compare the
values of $a_{0}$ and $a_{1}$, and extract the common bits as the final secret
message. They also perform authentication, where they verify the integrity of
the message using a secret key shared beforehand [23][24].

##  III Lossless and Secure Long-Distance Free-Space Transmission Techniques

This section delves into our innovative techniques for the secure and loss-
free transmission of data over extensive distances via air or space.

###  III-A Quantum-Aware LDPC Coding

####  III-A1 LDPC Code Parameter Optimization

Degree Distribution Optimization:

  * •

Extended Definition and Impact: The degree distribution of an LDPC code,
represented by the polynomials $\lambda(x)$ for variable nodes and $\rho(x)$
for check nodes, fundamentally determines the code’s performance in terms of
error correction efficiency and rate. These polynomials dictate how bits are
interconnected within the LDPC graph.

  * •

Technical Enhancement: A comprehensive optimization function that not only
maximizes mutual information I(X; Y) and minimizes QBER but also considers the
decoding threshold and the code rate. The optimization can integrate more
complex constraints related to the noise model of the quantum channel.

  * •

New Mathematical Formulation:
Optimization Goal:

$\max\bigl{(}I(X;Y)-\lambda(\text{QBER})-\delta(\text{Code Rate})\bigr{)}$ (6)

Subject to:

$\lambda(x)=\sum_{i=2}^{d_{v}}\lambda_{i}x^{i-1},\quad\rho(x)=\sum_{i=2}^{d_{c}}\rho_{i}x^{i-1}$
(7)

Here, $\delta$ represents the additional constraint related to the code rate.

Channel Adaptation:

  * •

Machine Learning Prediction and Iterative Update Algorithm: a machine learning
and an iterative update algorithm designed to predict upcoming alterations in
the quantum channel and modify the LDPC code parameters, guided by immediate
feedback from the quantum communication system.

    1. 1.

Initialization: Set initial LDPC code parameters based on average channel
conditions.

    2. 2.

Real-time Feedback Loop:

       * *

Collect real-time CQ data.

       * *

Adjust LDPC parameters for immediate channel conditions.

    3. 3.

Predictive Adjustment:

       * *

Use the ML model to predict short-term future CQ.

       * *

Preemptively adjust LDPC parameters based on predictions.

    4. 4.

Iterative Update:

       * *

Continuously repeat steps 2 and 3.

       * *

Employ a decay factor to balance between recent adjustments and new
predictions.

  * •

Pseudocode:

⬇

# LSTM Model for Channel Prediction

def build_lstm_model(input_shape):

model = Sequential()

model.add(LSTM(50, return_sequences=True, input_shape=input_shape))

model.add(LSTM(50))

model.add(Dense(1))

model.compile(optimizer=’adam’, loss=’mse’)

return model

# Update LDPC Parameters

def update_ldpc_parameters(current_params, current_cq, predicted_cq):

# Algorithm to update LDPC parameters based on current and predicted CQ

# Example: Adjust code rate based on SNR

snr_threshold = 10

if current_cq[’SNR’] < snr_threshold or predicted_cq[’SNR’] < snr_threshold:

new_params = adjust_code_rate(current_params, decrease=True)

else:

new_params = adjust_code_rate(current_params, decrease=False)

return new_params

# Main Loop for Iterative Update

def iterative_update_loop(initial_params, model, channel_data):

params = initial_params

for t in range(len(channel_data)-1):

current_cq = get_current_cq(channel_data, t)

predicted_cq = model.predict(channel_data[t:t+1])

params = update_ldpc_parameters(params, current_cq, predicted_cq)

# Update the LDPC codes with new params

return params

####  III-A2 Adaptive Decoding Algorithm with Graph Neural Network Enhanced
Belief Propagation and Adaptive Iteration

We propose a GNN-enhanced adaptive decoding algorithm for quantum
communication, improving LDPC code decoding by adapting to channel changes and
enhancing security with decoy states for eavesdropping detection and privacy
amplification methods to secure fi- nal keys, significantly increasing
transmission reliability and protection. Standard BP Equation[25]:

$m^{(t+1)}_{i\rightarrow j}=2\tanh^{-1}\left(\prod_{k\in N(i)\backslash
j}\tanh\left(\frac{m^{(t)}_{k\rightarrow i}}{2}\right)\right)$ (8)

Modification with GNN:
Adjust messages $m^{(t)}_{i\rightarrow j}$ using a GNN. The GNN predicts the
likelihood of error in each node’s message, influencing the BP update rule.

GNN Model Design:

  * •

Input: Messages from each node, current iteration number, and additional
features like channel conditions.

  * •

Architecture: Utilize a GNN architecture capable of handling graph-structured
data. Layers can include graph convolutional networks (GCN) or Graph Attention
Networks (GAT).

  * •

Output: Adjusted messages and probability of error for each node.

Adaptive Iteration:

  * •

Dynamically Adjust Iterations: Based on channel conditions and convergence
rate, the number of iterations, $T$, is adapted.

  * •

Stopping Criterion: Utilize error patterns and rate of convergence to
determine when to stop the iterations.

Mathematical Representation:

  * •

Let $m^{(t)}_{i\rightarrow j}$ be the message from node $i$ to node $j$ at
iteration $t$.

  * •

GNN output influences the update rule:

$m^{(t+1)}_{i\rightarrow j}=GNN(m^{(t)}_{i\rightarrow j},\text{features})$ (9)

  * •

Adaptive iteration count $T$ based on GNN feedback and channel conditions.

Pseudocode:

⬇

class GNNModel(torch.nn.Module):

#Graph Neural Network model using GCN layers.

def __init__(self, input_dim, hidden_dim, output_dim):

super().__init__()

self.conv1 = GCNConv(input_dim, hidden_dim) # First GCN layer

self.conv2 = GCNConv(hidden_dim, output_dim) # Second GCN layer

def forward(self, x, edge_index):

x = F.relu(self.conv1(x, edge_index)) # Activation function

return self.conv2(x, edge_index) # Output layer

def enhanced_bp(messages, gnn_model, edge_index, num_iterations):

#Enhanced BP decoding with GNN model.

for _ in range(num_iterations):

messages_tensor = torch.tensor(messages, dtype=torch.float) # Messages to
tensor

messages = gnn_model(messages_tensor, edge_index).detach().numpy() # GNN model
output

return messages

def adaptive_decoding_algorithm(messages, channel_conditions, edge_index):

#Adaptive decoding based on channel conditions.

input_dim, hidden_dim, output_dim = messages.shape[1], 64, messages.shape[1]

gnn_model = GNNModel(input_dim, hidden_dim, output_dim)

T = 10 if channel_conditions[’SNR’] > 10 else 20 # Iterations based on SNR

adjusted_messages = enhanced_bp(messages, gnn_model, edge_index, T) # Decode
with GNN

return decode(adjusted_messages) # Final decoding

####  III-A3 Security Enhancement Techniques

Decoy State Method:

  * •

Employ decoy states with varying intensities to estimate channel parameters.

  * •

Use statistical methods to analyze the difference in detection rates between
signal and decoy states to estimate $P_{loss}$ and detect eavesdropping.

  * •

The estimation can be formulated as solving a set of linear inequalities
derived from decoy state intensities and detection rates [20].

Privacy Amplification:

  * •

After decoding, apply a hash function $H$ to the key to reduce its length and
eliminate partial information.

  * •

The process can be represented as [22]:

$K_{final}=H(K_{decoded})$ (10)

  * •

The choice of $H$ and the length of $K_{final}$ are critical and depend on the
estimated QBER and eavesdropping probabilities.

###  III-B PAT Technologies

####  III-B1 Design

The PAT system is designed to automatically adjust the direction and position
of quantum signal transmission and reception equipment, ensuring optimal
alignment between communicating parties. This is crucial for minimizing signal
loss and maintaining high fidelity of the quantum state during transmission.

The PAT system consists of three main components: a pointing device, a
tracking device, and a control device. The pointing device is responsible for
directing the quantum signal beam toward the intended receiver, using a
combination of mechanical and optical elements, such as mirrors, lenses, and
motors. The tracking device is responsible for detecting the incoming quantum
signal beam from the transmitter, using a photodetector or a camera. The
control device is responsible for coordinating the pointing and tracking
devices, using feedback loops and algorithms, to achieve the desired alignment
and stability.

The PAT system operates in two modes: a coarse mode and a fine mode. The
coarse mode is used to establish the initial alignment between the transmitter
and receiver, using a wide-angle beam and a low-resolution detector. The fine
mode is used to refine the alignment and maintain stability, using a narrow-
angle beam and a high-resolution detector.

####  III-B2 Performance Evaluation and Optimization Algorithms

The performance of the PAT system can be quantified by several metrics, such
as alignment error, signal acquisition probability, and pointing stability.
These metrics can be formulated by mathematical equations, as follows:

Alignment Error Correction:

The alignment error ($e_{a}$) is modeled as a function of the angular
misalignment ($\theta_{m}$) and the distance ($d$) between the transmitter and
receiver:

$e_{a}=f(\theta_{m},d)$ (11)

where $f(\cdot)$ represents the functional relationship, which is determined
empirically or through simulation. The alignment error measures the deviation
of the quantum signal beam from the ideal optical axis, which can result in
signal loss or state degradation. The PAT system aims to minimize the
alignment error by adjusting the pointing and tracking devices accordingly.

The alignment error correction algorithm ($AEC$) can be expressed as:

$AEC=\arg\min_{\theta_{p},\theta_{t}}e_{a}(\theta_{p}-\theta_{t},d)$ (12)

where $\theta_{p}$ and $\theta_{t}$ are the pointing and tracking angles,
respectively. The AEC algorithm finds the optimal pointing and tracking angles
that minimize the alignment error, using methods such as gradient descent or
Newton’s method.

Signal Acquisition:

The probability of successful signal acquisition ($P_{a}$) depends on the
signal-to-noise ratio (SNR) and the alignment precision ($\sigma$):

$P_{a}=g(SNR,\sigma)$ (13)

with $g(\cdot)$ encapsulating the acquisition algorithm’s efficiency under
varying SNR conditions and alignment precisions. The signal acquisition
probability measures the likelihood of establishing a quantum link between the
transmitter and receiver, which can be affected by noise sources, such as
background light, thermal noise, and dark counts. The PAT system aims to
maximize the signal acquisition probability by optimizing the SNR and the
alignment precision.

The signal acquisition algorithm ($SAC$) can be expressed as:

$SAC=\arg\max_{SNR,\sigma}P_{a}(SNR,\sigma)$ (14)

where $SNR$ and $\sigma$ are the signal-to-noise ratio and the alignment
precision, respectively. The SAC algorithm finds the optimal SNR and alignment
precision that maximize the signal acquisition probability, using methods such
as thresholding or Bayesian inference.

Pointing Stability:

The pointing stability requirement ($S_{p}$) to maintain the quantum link can
be expressed as:

$S_{p}<\frac{\lambda}{D_{eff}}$ (15)

where $\lambda$ is the wavelength of the quantum signal, and $D_{eff}$ is the
effective aperture diameter of the transmitter/receiver system. The pointing
stability requirement measures the maximum allowable angular deviation of the
quantum signal beam from the optical axis, which external factors, such as
wind, vibration, and turbulence can cause. The PAT system aims to satisfy the
pointing stability requirement by stabilizing the pointing and tracking
devices against these factors.

The pointing stability algorithm ($PSA$) can be expressed as:

$PSA=\arg\min_{\Delta\theta_{p},\Delta\theta_{t}}S_{p}(\Delta\theta_{p},\Delta\theta_{t})$
(16)

where $\Delta\theta_{p}$ and $\Delta\theta_{t}$ are the pointing and tracking
angular deviations, respectively. The PSA algorithm finds the optimal pointing
and tracking angular deviations that minimize the pointing stability
requirement, using methods such as PID control or Kalman filter.

###  III-C Atmospheric Quantum Correction Algorithm

####  III-C1 Design

AQCA is integrated within the LF QSDC framework to address challenges such as
atmospheric turbulence, absorption, and scattering. These phenomena can
degrade the quantum state of photons, leading to increased quantum bit error
rates (QBER) and reduced communication security and reliability.

The AQCA consists of four main modules: a disturbance modeler, a quantum error
corrector, an adaptive optics system, and a signal enhancer and recoverer. The
disturbance modeler is responsible for estimating the atmospheric parameters
and their impact on the quantum signal. The quantum error corrector is
responsible for applying QEC techniques to the quantum signal. The adaptive
optics system is responsible for adjusting the quantum signal’s path in real
time. The signal enhancer and recoverer are responsible for processing the
quantum signal to improve the SNR and recover the original quantum state.

####  III-C2 Mathematical Formulation

The AQCA leverages advanced mathematical models and algorithms to correct for
atmospheric distortions. Key components of the algorithm include:

Modeling Atmospheric Disturbances:

The Kolmogorov theory models the atmospheric turbulence. The strength of the
turbulence is characterized by the Fried parameter ($r_{0}$), which represents
the coherence length of the wavefront. The effect of the turbulence on the
quantum signal is quantified by the scintillation index ($\sigma_{I}^{2}$),
which measures the intensity fluctuations of the signal. The scintillation
index can be approximated by the Rytov approximation, which is valid for weak
to moderate turbulence regimes. The Rytov approximation is given by:

$\sigma_{I}^{2}\approx 1.23C_{n}^{2}k^{7/6}L^{11/6}$ (17)

The atmospheric absorption is modeled by the Beer-Lambert law. The effect of
the absorption on the quantum signal is quantified by the transmittance ($T$),
which measures the fraction of the signal that reaches the receiver. The
transmittance is given by:

$T=e^{-\alpha L}$ (18)

The Mie theory models atmospheric scattering. The effect of the scattering on
the quantum signal is quantified by the scattering cross section
($\sigma_{s}$), which measures the probability of the signal being scattered
by a particle. The scattering cross section is given by:

$\sigma_{s}=\frac{2\pi^{5}d^{6}}{3\lambda^{4}}\left(\frac{n^{2}-1}{n^{2}+2}\right)^{2}Q_{ext}$
(19)

Quantum Error Correction (QEC):

The AQCA employs QEC techniques tailored to atmospheric conditions. These
techniques are designed to identify and correct errors induced by the
atmosphere, enhancing the resilience of quantum communication.

The AQCA selects the appropriate type of quantum code based on the quantum
signal’s modulation scheme. For phase-modulated signals, such as coherent
states or squeezed states, the AQCA uses CV codes, such as Gaussian codes or
non-Gaussian codes. For polarization-modulated signals, such as single photons
or entangled photons, the AQCA uses DV codes, such as stabilizer codes or non-
stabilizer codes.

The QEC process consists of three steps: encoding, syndrome measurement, and
decoding. Encoding is the process of applying a quantum code to the quantum
signal before transmission. Syndrome measurement is the process of measuring
the quantum signal after transmission to detect errors. Decoding is the
process of applying a quantum code to the quantum signal after syndrome
measurement to correct the errors.

Adaptive Optics System:

An adaptive optics system is integrated to dynamically adjust the quantum
signal’s path in real time, countering the effects of atmospheric turbulence.
The system uses feedback from the quantum signal itself to optimize the
transmission path.

The adaptive optics system consists of three main components: a wavefront
sensor, a deformable mirror, and a control unit. The wavefront sensor is
responsible for measuring the phase distortions of the quantum signal caused
by the turbulence. The deformable mirror is responsible for compensating the
phase distortions by applying a conjugate phase profile to the quantum signal.
The control unit is responsible for coordinating the wavefront sensor and the
deformable mirror, using feedback loops and algorithms, to achieve the optimal
wavefront correction.

The adaptive optics system operates in two modes: a closed-loop mode and an
open-loop mode. The closed-loop mode is used when the quantum signal is strong
enough to provide sufficient feedback for the wavefront sensor. The open-loop
mode is used when the quantum signal is too weak to provide sufficient
feedback for the wavefront sensor. In this case, the system uses a reference
beam, such as a laser beam, to provide the feedback for the wavefront sensor,
and applies the same correction to the quantum signal.

###  III-D Integration with LF QSDC Protocol

The integration of PAT technologies with the QSDC protocol involves the
synchronization of quantum state preparation, signal transmission, and
reception processes with the dynamic adjustments made by the PAT system.

The integration process can be summarized by the following steps:

  1. 1.

The transmitter and the receiver measure the atmospheric parameters, such as
the Fried parameter, the absorption coefficient, and the scattering cross
section, using the disturbance modeler module of the AQCA.

  2. 2.

The transmitter and the receiver select the appropriate quantum code, such as
a CV code or a DV code, based on the quantum signal’s modulation scheme and
the atmospheric parameters, using the quantum error corrector module of the
AQCA.

  3. 3.

The transmitter encodes the quantum state into the quantum signal, using a
quantum source and a quantum modulator, and applies the quantum code to the
quantum signal, using the encoding step of the QEC process.

  4. 4.

The transmitter directs the quantum signal toward the receiver, using the
pointing device of the PAT system, and adjusts the quantum signal’s path in
real-time, using the adaptive optics system module of the AQCA.

  5. 5.

The receiver detects the incoming quantum signal, using the tracking device of
the PAT system, and measures the quantum signal’s phase distortions, using the
wavefront sensor of the adaptive optics system.

  6. 6.

The receiver compensates the quantum signal’s phase distortions, using the
deformable mirror of the adaptive optics system, and enhances the quantum
signal’s SNR, using the signal enhancer and recoverer module of the AQCA.

  7. 7.

The receiver measures the quantum signal, using a quantum detector, and
applies the quantum code to the quantum signal, using the syndrome measurement
and decoding steps of the QEC process, to recover the original quantum state.

  8. 8.

The transmitter and the receiver exchange classical information, such as basis
choices, error correction codes, and privacy amplification keys, using a
classical channel, such as a radio or optical link.

  9. 9.

The transmitter and the receiver perform post-processing steps, such as error
correction, privacy amplification, and authentication, to ensure the security
and reliability of the quantum communication.

##  IV LF QSDC Simulation Plan and Analysis

In the forthcoming research phase, our primary objective is to thoroughly
simulate and evaluate the performance of our quantum-aware LDPC codes, PAT
technologies, and the atmospheric quantum correction algorithm.

###  IV-A Simulation Plan

Figure 2 outlines the process of the simulation plan:

StartInitialize Quantum ChannelGenerate Quantum StatesEncode with LDPCTransmit
Quantum StatesNoise and Interference SimulationReceive and DecodeError Rate
AnalysisAdjust LDPC ParametersEvaluate SecurityEndAdjustOKEnd Figure 2:
Flowchart outlining the overview of our simulation plan

The testing framework for the LF QSDC system meticulously evaluates its
operational efficacy, commencing with the initialization of the quantum
channel ($\mathcal{Q}_{C}$), a conduit essential for the transmission of
entangled photons ($\Psi_{\text{ent}}$). This phase sets the groundwork for
secure quantum communication by establishing a pathway for encoded quantum
states ($\Psi_{\text{enc}}$) utilizing quantum-aware LDPC coding
($C_{\text{LDPC}}$). Such encoding is pivotal, aiming to bolster error
correction capabilities without undermining the quantum states’ coherence and
security.

The protocol then progresses to the transmission phase
($\Phi_{\text{transmit}}$), where encoded quantum states are dispatched
through the free-space medium, encountering environmental noise
($\mathcal{N}$), simulating real-world atmospheric conditions. The subsequent
reception and decoding phase is critical, employing $C_{\text{LDPC}}$ to
ameliorate errors introduced during transmission, highlighted by the quantum
channel’s intrinsic error characteristics ($\epsilon_{\text{quantum}}$). An
in-depth error rate analysis ($\eta_{\text{error}}$) ensues, assessing the
integrity of the received quantum information against the original
transmission. This analysis is instrumental in driving the iterative
optimization of LDPC parameters ($\Theta_{\text{opt}}$), with the goal of
minimizing error rates and maximizing system fidelity ($F_{\text{system}}$).

Concluding the protocol, a rigorous security evaluation
($\Sigma_{\text{security}}$) is conducted to ensure the system’s robustness
against potential eavesdropping attempts, affirming the LF QSDC system’s
ability to preserve the secrecy and accuracy of the information sent.

###  IV-B Predicted Results and Analysis

This part aims to assess the theoretical efficacy of our suggested lossless
free space and extended-range transmission methods, incorporating quantum-
aware LDPC, PAT technologies, and the atmospheric quantum correction
algorithm.

Figure 3 shows the predicted secure information transmission rates of the
proposed transmission scheme, the secure coding based on JEEC Coding [15], the
secure coding based on LPS codes, and Cs for a practical QSDC system, without
the consideration of the loss caused by the delayed fiber [26].

$0$$5$$10$$15$$20$$25$$30$$35$$0$$0.5$$1$$1.5$$2$$2.5$$\cdot 10^{-3}$Total
Channel Loss (dB)Rate (pulse/sec)Secure information transmission rates
comparisonCs of a practical QSDCSecure information rate of JEEC CodingSecure
information rate of secure coding scheme based on LPS codePredicted Secure
information rate of our proposed system Figure 3: Graph showcasing the
predicted secure information transmission rates of the proposed transmission
scheme, the secure coding based on JEEC Coding [15], the secure coding based
on LPS codes, and Cs for a practical QSDC system, without the consideration of
the loss caused by the delayed fiber [26]

Our estimations for our proposed system’s performance are substantiated by
empirical evidence and mathematical proofs from recent research. Studies by
Roffe [27] on quantum LDPC codes and by Ghilea [28] on quasi-cyclic multi-edge
LDPC codes demonstrate significant advancements in error correction, decoder
efficiency, and communication distance for quantum key distribution systems.
Furthermore, Mele, Lami, and Giovannetti [29] Investigated how quantum
communication technologies withstand noise and attenuation, laying a robust
foundation for our forecasts. The results collectively highlight the
capability of our suggested system to improve upcoming QSDC systems, providing
robust empirical and mathematical backing for our calculations.

The forecasts indicate that our system will improve the operational benchmark
for QSDC systems by showcasing its capability to maintain elevated secure
information speeds, even amidst considerable channel loss. Yet, the present
version of our system remains incapable of facilitating effective long-range
QSDC communications. However, our upcoming improvements and updates to the
coding of our system will concentrate on enhancing error rectification and
adjusting to the unique difficulties of quantum channels, like quantum noise
and decoherence. The enhancements are set to align our system with the
rigorous criteria of practical QSDC.

##  V Implementation Plan for LF QSDC

###  V-A Technical Implementation of LF QSDC

####  V-A1 1-Way Transmission Protocols in Free-Space Channel

For extensive free-space communication, the one-way transmission methods
(RECON protocol and QKPC protocol) might offer more benefits than the two-way
protocols, given the various elements in the free-space channel influencing
communication [30]. The conveyance of data across extensive distances via a
free-space channel is fraught with multiple difficulties. Factors such as
beam-spreading, atmospheric turbulence, absorption and scattering, background
light (sunlight), geometrical loss, and weather conditions could all affect
communication [31, 32, 33]. Figure 4 summarizes the main characteristics of
free-space channel and their impacts on optical signal transmission.

Figure 4: Summarizes the main characteristics of free-space channel and their
impacts on optical signal transmission[30]

Consequently, one-way transmission methods like RE- CON or QKPC protocols
might offer greater benefits than the two-way approaches used in LF QSDC [34].
Protocols for one-way transmission simplify the process by removing the
necessity for the signal to return to the sender for additional processing,
thus decreasing the travel distance of quantum states [35, 36].

####  V-A2 Experimental Implementation

In 2020, there was a reported successful experimental setup of the free-space
DL04 QSDC protocol. The setup, as shown in Figure 5, achieved a data
transmission rate of 500 bits per second across a 10-meter free-space channel
with a notably low Quantum Bit Error Rate (QBER) of $0.49\%\pm 0.27\%$[37].

Attaining a low QBER in experiments is a key mea- sure of QSDC’s resilience
and dependability in free- space channels [38, 39]. A minimal QBER indicates
the ability to convey quantum data with great accuracy, crucial for ensuring
secure communication [40, 41]. Attaining a data transfer speed of 500 bits per
second across a 10-meter free-space channel showcases the pro- tocol’s
capability for effective data transfer [37].

The experimental arrangement employed a phase encoding technique to transmit
quantum states in a vacuum. In this method, Bob introduces one of four
possible phases 0, $\pi$/2, $\pi$, 3$\pi$/2 to each pulse passing through a
longer optical path, creating four distinct phase-encoded quantum states.
Employing a phase-encoding approach in the experiment, enabling the generation
of four unique phase-encoded quantum states, demonstrates the real-world use
of advanced quantum communication methods in open-space settings [37].

Figure 5: Summary of the main characteristics of the free-space channel and
their impacts on optical signal transmission[37]

Included in the experimental arrangement were systems for identifying
eavesdropping, an essential element of secure quantum communication. The
protocol’s capacity to adjust pulses for security verifications and secure
information encoding showcases its effectiveness in maintaining communication
confidentiality and integrity, even amidst possible risks[37]. For LF QSDC,
this characteristic is crucial, given the paramount importance of safeguarding
communication from eavesdropping.

Included in the experimental arrangement were sys- tems for identifying
eavesdropping, an essential element of secure quantum communication. The
protocol’s ca- pacity to adjust pulses for security verifications and se- cure
information encoding showcases its effectiveness in maintaining communication
confidentiality and integrity, even amidst possible risks [37].

The success of these experiments confirms the practicality of LF QSDC,
showcasing the protocol’s capacity to convey quantum data with great accuracy
and safety via free-space channels.

###  V-B Feasibility and Adaptability of Satellite-based QSDC

####  V-B1 Feasibility of Satellite Communication with LF QSDC

Earlier studies on the satellite-to-ground transfer of quantum states have
yielded encouraging outcomes, with QBERs remaining within the tolerable limits
for safe quantum communication[42, 43, 44]. The ability to transmit
effectively across distances from 2,200 km to more than 36,000 km, maintaining
link losses in the range of 100 to 110 dB, demonstrates that basic physics
enables quantum communication across the extensive distances needed for
satellite communication[44, 45].

The DL04 protocol, devoid of memory, plays a crucial role in LF QSDC by
simplifying the processes of quantum state storage and management [12]. The
DL04 protocol’s LF flexibility in adapting to free-space environments renders
it an appealing choice for satellite communication, especially in addressing
the difficulties of transmitting quantum signals across Earth’s atmosphere.
The incorporation of quantum-aware LDPC coding into LF QSDC markedly enhances
the system’s error rectification abilities, tackling the problems caused by
extensive transmission and atmospheric influences [46, 47]. Furthermore, the
use of PAT technologies helps sustain a consistent and precise communication
connection between satellites and terrestrial stations [48].

####  V-B2 Expanding Feasibility with LF QSDC

Enhancing the feasibility of LF QSDC involves comprehensive advancements
across various technical and regulatory dimensions. Key initiatives include
refining beam propagation and encoding methods to counter atmospheric
disturbances and environmental disruptions as shown in Figure 5, ensuring high
communication accuracy and low Quantum Bit Error Rate (QBER) across vast
distances [49, 50]. Additionally, integrating quantum repeaters and relay
satellites expands the scope of QSDC, enabling a global quantum communication
network that overcomes spatial limitations inherent in direct quantum
communication [51]. Improvements in daylight operation capabilities through
advanced detectors and narrowband filters are crucial for the system’s
effectiveness in satellite applications, addressing challenges posed by solar
radiation [52].

Further, merging QSDC systems with existing satellite communication
infrastructures requires addressing payload capacity, energy needs, and
upgrade compatibility, ensuring effective implementation of quantum
communication methods [53]. Promoting standardization and interoperability
among quantum communication systems through uniform protocols and error-
correcting techniques is essential for establishing a scalable and unified
global network [54]. Developing regulatory and policy frameworks is also
critical for overseeing the application and ensuring the security and privacy
of satellite-based quantum communication, addressing potential legal and
security issues [55]. These collective efforts will significantly enhance the
practicality of satellite-based LF QSDC, paving the way for a secure and
efficient global quantum communication network.

###  V-C Web 3.0 Compatibility

The integration of LF QSDC with Web 3.0 technologies marks a pivotal
advancement in securing decentralized networks through quantum communication
methods. This collaboration aims to create a secure transactional layer within
Web 3.0, enabling nodes to directly and securely exchange data, thereby
enhancing transaction secrecy and reliability against both conventional and
quantum cryptographic threats [56, 57, 58]. Furthermore, the adaptation of LF
QSDC within Web 3.0 involves developing quantum-resistant smart contracts,
ensuring their execution and outcomes are secured through quantum
communication, thus requiring smart contract systems to support encryption and
verification processes compatible with LF QSDC protocols [59, 60, 61].

Additionally, LF QSDC contributes to Web 3.0’s goals of user privacy and
anonymity by establishing secure, direct communication channels that eliminate
the need for intermediaries in key exchanges or transaction verifications.
This approach not only strengthens confidentiality within the network but also
introduces an additional layer of transaction security based on quantum
mechanics, offering a robust defense against potential quantum cryptographic
attacks [14, 62].

For LF QSDC’s successful integration into Web 3.0, it must align with existing
protocols, modifying transaction verification systems to accommodate quantum-
secured information and ensuring the ledger supports and accurately documents
quantum-secured transactions [63, 64, 65]. Additionally, considering the
increasing transaction volumes on Web 3.0 networks,

###  V-D Stages of Gradual Implementation

####  V-D1 Phase 1: Development of Basic LF QSDC Infrastructure

The initial configuration focuses on establishing a basic system to create,
store, and transmit entangled photon pairs between two locations, Alice and
Bob, requiring optical systems like photon sources, detectors, and
communication channels. Future efforts will explore light storage devices
using electromagnetic transparency and optical delays for sequential EPR pair
production, aiming to integrate these technologies into LF QSDC and set up
security measures to detect eavesdropping and evaluate secure communication
efficiency.

####  V-D2 Phase 2: Enhancing Efficiency and Security

With the advancement of technology, enhance and fine-tune methods for light
storage to prolong photon retention while maintaining their quantum
conditions. The advancement is vital for broadening the real-world application
of LF QSDC. Enhance the application of optical lags to guarantee accurate
synchronization in the transmission of the C-sequence and M-sequence. This
includes fine-tuning the delay $\tau$ to accommodate different distances and
transmission rates, ensuring that the system can operate efficiently over long
distances. Enhance the protocols for eavesdropping checks by incorporating
more sophisticated quantum measurements and real-time analysis. This
improvement aims to reduce error rates and increase the system’s resilience
against potential quantum attacks.

####  V-D3 Phase 3: Integration with Global Quantum Networks

This stage entails partnering with current quantum communication endeavors to
establish a cohesive and secure network of quantum communication. Combine LF
QSDC with burgeoning Web 3.0 technologies and the Quantum Internet,
facilitating protected, immediate quantum communication for diverse uses,
ranging from secure messaging to quantum cloud computing.

Figure 6 summarizes the overview of the stages of gradual implementation:

Phase 1: Basic LF QSDC Infrastructure Development Development of Light Storage
Devices and Optical Delays Implementation of Basic Security Protocols Phase 2:
Enhancing Efficiency and Security Refinement of Light Storage Techniques
Optimization of Optical Delays Enhanced Eavesdropping Checks Phase 3:
Integration with Global Quantum Networks Expansion to Intercontinental
Distances Integration with Web 3.0 and Quantum Internet Integration with QAI
for Optimized Communication
Figure 6: Flowchart showing the overview of the stages of gradual
implementation

###  V-E Business Case of LF QSDC in The Web 3.0 Era

Integrating LF QSDC with Web 3.0 represents a significant advancement in
securing decentralized networks against quantum computing threats, emphasizing
its transformative potential for Web 3.0’s security and trust mechanisms in an
increasingly digital and quantum-aware world [56]. This integration addresses
the vulnerabilities of traditional cryptographic methods to quantum computing
by offering a quantum mechanics-based solution for secure, direct
communication over long distances without intermediaries, significantly
enhancing Web 3.0’s security posture and ensuring sustained trust and
reliability [56].

The necessity for quantum-resistant security protocols in Web 3.0 is
increasingly critical, with LF QSDC fulfilling this requirement by providing a
secure, scalable, and efficient framework. This advancement not only protects
against future quantum threats but also reinforces defenses against
sophisticated conventional attacks, positioning Web 3.0 networks at the
cutting edge of secure digital technology. The integration of LF QSDC into Web
3.0 is especially pertinent as the adoption of Web 3.0 expands across various
sectors, highlighting the growing demand for robust security solutions in the
face of quantum computing’s rise and offering a competitive advantage to early
adopters [56].

However, integrating LF QSDC into Web 3.0 comes with challenges, including
technological complexity and interoperability issues. Strategic partnerships,
ongoing research and development, and adaptable integration strategies are
essential for mitigating these risks and staying abreast of quantum computing
advancements. Despite initial costs related to research, technology
acquisition, and system upgrades, the long-term benefits of enhanced security
and network durability justify the investment, promising increased user
confidence and new opportunities in quantum-secure technologies [56]. The
strategic incorporation of LF QSDC into Web 3.0 not only fortifies network
security but also positions Web 3.0 networks as leaders in the next era of
digital innovation, ready for the challenges of the quantum computing age.

##  VI Discussion

###  VI-A Comparison With Similar Protocols

####  VI-A1 Security

LF QSDC leverages quantum mechanics’ inherent principles to offer a
groundbreaking level of security, making it particularly resilient against
both eavesdropping and sophisticated quantum attacks. This protocol benefits
from quantum phenomena such as the no-cloning theorem and entanglement,
ensuring that any interception attempt would alter the quantum state, alerting
the communicating parties to a potential security breach. Unlike Quantum Key
Distribution, LF QSDC transmits encrypted data directly without the need for
key exchanges, providing enhanced security against quantum and classical
threats and making it highly suitable for secure communications in the
decentralized nature of the Web 3.0 era. LF QSDC and DL04 both offer high
levels of security based on quantum principles; however, LF QSDC’s emphasis on
long-distance free-space communication adds an extra layer of complexity and
potential vulnerability due to atmospheric effects, which it addresses with
advanced PAT systems [66, 67]. Additionally, LF QSDC does not require pre-
shared secret keys, offering a theoretical security advantage over other
protocols such as RECON protocol, which depends on the secure distribution of
initial keys.

####  VI-A2 Distance

Yin explored free-space QSDC’s capability for long-distance communication
through free-space channels and successfully demonstrated quantum
teleportation over a 97-km channel and entanglement distribution over a
101.8-km two-link channel, achieving an average fidelity of 80.4% for six
initial states despite significant channel loss (35-53 dB for teleportation
and 66-85 dB for entanglement distribution)[68]. This showcases LF QSDC’s
potential for satellite-based quantum communication, significantly extending
the feasible communication distance beyond traditional QSDC methods. Achieving
free-space QSDC over distances of 100 kilometers has been validated through
other successful experiments in quantum teleportation and the distribution of
entanglement across distances surpassing 100 km[69].

####  VI-A3 Channel Loss and Atmospheric Disturbances

LF QSDC faces significant challenges related to channel loss and atmospheric
disturbances, particularly over long distances. Yin highlights the critical
role of the PAT systems in overcoming these challenges, such as atmospheric
turbulence, which can severely affect the stability and accuracy of quantum
communication. The PAT system’s ability to maintain high tracking accuracy,
better than 3.5 µrad over a 97 km free-space link, is essential for ensuring
that the quantum signal remains aligned with the receiver despite atmospheric
turbulence and other disturbances. Additionally, the inclusion of coarse and
fine tracking systems, controlled by a close-loop via the telescope’s own rack
and piezo ceramics at the receiver’s side, aims to reduce low-frequency
shaking caused by ground settlement and passing vehicles, achieving an average
fidelity of 80.4% over a 35-53 dB loss quantum channel[68].

####  VI-A4 Cost

Implementing LF QSDC, especially for applications such as global Web 3.0
networks, involves sophisticated technology and infrastructure. This includes
satellites, ground stations, and advanced tracking technologies, making it
more expensive compared to other QSDC protocols that operate over shorter
distances or through fiber channels. The investment in technology and
infrastructure signifies a considerable cost, which is a critical
consideration for the widespread adoption of LF QSDC in various applications.

###  VI-B Limitations and Future Work

The advent of Free-Space Long-Distance QSDC is poised to revolutionize the
QSDC landscape by facilitating secure quantum communication across vast
distances, unencumbered by the physical limitations of fiber-optic systems.
This innovation is expected to have a profound impact on the implementation
and scalability of QSDC technologies, enabling a seamless and secure global
quantum communication network.

LF QSDC’s integration into Web 3.0 infrastructure signifies a monumental shift
towards creating a decentralized and secure internet, where the intrinsic
security features of quantum communication can protect against ever-evolving
cyber threats. The ability of LF QSDC to operate in free space allows for the
establishment of quantum links between any two points on the globe, directly
supporting the foundational principles of Web 3.0 by enhancing data integrity,
security, and privacy across decentralized networks.

Furthermore, LF QSDC’s potential to extend the reach of quantum networks
without the need for extensive physical infrastructure paves the way for more
inclusive access to quantum communication technologies. This democratization
of technology is crucial for leveraging the full potential of quantum
advancements in various sectors, including secure communications, distributed
computing, and beyond, marking a significant leap toward a quantum-integrated
future.

However, it is important to note that our model is a preliminary theoretical
proposal of an LF QSDC system which comes with its own limitations and
challenges as discussed below:

####  VI-B1 Theoretical Challenges

  * •

Quantum Decoherence and Noise: Quantum states are highly susceptible to
decoherence and environmental noise, which can severely limit the distance
over which LF QSDC can be effectively implemented.

  * •

Security Proofs: Complete, universally accepted security proofs for LF QSDC
under all potential attack scenarios are challenging to develop, raising
concerns about its absolute security.

####  VI-B2 Technological Constraints

  * •

Quantum Sources and Detectors: The efficiency and reliability of quantum
sources (e.g., single-photon sources) and detectors are critical, yet current
technologies may not provide the necessary performance for long-distance
communication.

  * •

Atmospheric Interference: Free-space transmission is significantly affected by
atmospheric conditions (e.g., cloud cover, atmospheric turbulence), which can
degrade the quantum signal over long distances.

####  VI-B3 Implementation Challenges

  * •

Infrastructure Development: Establishing a global LF QSDC network requires
significant investment in both ground-based and potentially satellite-based
infrastructure, posing a substantial financial and logistical challenge.

  * •

Interoperability: Compatibility with existing communication technologies and
standards is crucial for widespread adoption, necessitating complex
integration efforts.

####  VI-B4 Impact Considerations

  * •

Scalability: While promising for point-to-point communication, scaling LF QSDC
to a multi-node quantum network presents considerable technical challenges.

  * •

Accessibility: The high cost and complexity of LF QSDC technology may limit
its accessibility, particularly in developing regions, potentially
exacerbating the digital divide.

  * •

Regulatory and Ethical Issues: The deployment of LF QSDC might raise questions
regarding regulation, data sovereignty, and privacy, requiring careful
consideration and potentially new legal frameworks.

##  VII Conclusion

This document delves into the integration of distant, free-space quantum
secure direct communication in the digital age of Web 3.0, introducing a
theoretical model aimed at enhancing the security aspects of the worldwide
networking structure in the quantum age. This document highlights LF QSDC’s
capability to strengthen the Web 3.0 framework against various cryptographic
dangers, including quantum and classical, by utilizing direct quantum
communication, bypassing traditional key exchange methods.

LF QSDC’s core is based on the memory-free DL04 protocol, implemented by
merging quantum-aware, low-density parity-check codes, sophisticated pointing,
acquisition, and tracking technologies, along with algorithms for atmospheric
quantum correction. These factors play a crucial role in overcoming current
environmental and technical challenges that hinder the effective use of
quantum communication technologies, especially in the realm of long-distance
free-space communication. Additionally, we suggest a strategic plan that
includes the development of quantum communication technologies, integrating
them with the current Web 3.0 framework, and overcoming environmental and
technical hurdles to ensure a secure and efficient data transmission channel.

Implementing LF QSDC in Web 3.0 networks presents intricate engineering
hurdles and necessitates significant progress in quantum communication
technology. Upcoming studies might focus on creating advanced quantum error
correction methods to improve the accuracy of quantum data transmission.
Furthermore, investigating cutting-edge PAT systems to enhance the stability
and precision of quantum signal alignment might greatly aid in the
practicality of LF QSDC. Developing scalable quantum network structures for
effortless integration with current Web 3.0 systems is another vital field for
future research, guaranteeing that quantum security improvements do not hinder
the network’s operational efficiency or accessibility.

##  VIII Acknowledgement

Author Contributions: Under the guidance of Yew Kee Wong, Yifan Zhou, Yan
Shing Liang, Xinlin Zhou, and Zi Yan Li conducted the research with Yifan Zhou
and Yan Shing Liang leading the methodology development. The original draft
was primarily written by Yifan Zhou, with significant contributions from
Xinlin Zhou, Zi Yan Li, and Yan Shing Liang. Xinlin Zhou also undertook the
task of reviewing and editing the manuscript. Yew Kee Wong supervised the
project, provided revisions, and managed project administration.

## References

  * [1] P. W. Shor, “Algorithms for quantum computation: Discrete logarithms and factoring,” in Proc. 35th Annu. Symp. Foundations of Computer Science. IEEE, 1994, pp. 124–134.
  * [2] L. K. Grover, “Quantum mechanics helps in searching for a needle in a haystack,” Phys. Rev. Lett., vol. 79, no. 2, pp. 325–328, 1997.
  * [3] I. B. Djordjevic, O. Milenkovic, and B. Vasic, “Generalized low-density parity-check codes for optical communication systems,” J. Lightw. Technol., vol. 23, no. 5, pp. 1939–1946, 2005.
  * [4] A. Thangaraj, S. Dihidar, A. R. Calderbank, S. W. McLaughlin, and J. Merolla, “Applications of LDPC codes to the wiretap channel,” IEEE Trans. Inf. Theory, vol. 53, no. 8, pp. 2933–2945, 2007.
  * [5] J. L. Carter and M. N. Wegman, “Universal classes of hash functions,” J.Computer and System Sciences, vol. 18, no. 2, pp. 143–154, 1979.
  * [6] N. Gisin, G. Ribordy, W. Tittel, and H. Zbinden, “Quantum cryptogra- phy,” Rev. Mod. Phys., vol. 74, no. 1, p. 145, 2002.
  * [7] C. H. Bennett and G. Brassard, “Quantum cryptography: public key distribution and coin tossing,” in IEEE Int. Conf. Computers, Systems, Signal Processing., 1984.
  * [8] R. Qi, Z. Sun, Z. Lin, P. Niu, W. Hao, L. Song, Q. Huang, J. Gao, L. Yin, and G. Long, “Implementation and security analysis of practical quantum secure direct communication,” Light Sci. Appl., vol. 8, no. 1, p. 22, 2019.
  * [9] C. Wang, F. Deng, Y. Li, X. Liu, and G. L. Long, “Quantum secure di- rect communication with high-dimension quantum superdense coding,” Phys.Rev. A, vol. 71, no. 4, p. 044305, 2005.
  * [10] L. Yin, C. Jiang, C. Jiang, N. Ge, L. Kuang, and M. Guizani, “A communication framework with unified efficiency and secrecy,” IEEE Wirel. Commun., vol. 26, no. 4, pp. 133–139, 2019.
  * [11] F. Deng and G. Long, “Secure direct communication with a quantum one-time pad,” Phys.Rev. A, vol. 69, no. 5, p. 052319, 2004.
  * [12] F. Deng, G. Long, and X. Liu, “Two-step quantum direct communication protocol using the Einstein-Podolsky-Rosen pair block,” Phys.Rev. A, vol. 68, no. 4, p. 042317, 2003.
  * [13] Z. Gao, T. Li, and Z. Li, “Long-distance measurement-device– independent quantum secure direct communication,” EPL (Eurpphys Lett.), vol. 125, no. 4, p. 40004, 2019.
  * [14] W. Zhang, D. Ding, Y. Sheng, L. Zhou, B. Shi, and G. Guo, “Quantum secure direct communication with quantum memory,” Phys. Rev. Lett., vol. 118, no. 22, p. 220501, 2017.
  * [15] Z. Sun, L. Song, Q. Huang, L. Yin, G. Long, J. Lu, L. Hanzo. “Toward practical quantum secure direct communication: A quantum-memory-free protocol and code design,” IEEE Transactions on Communications, 68(9), 5778-5792, 2020.
  * [16] I. B. Djordjevic, O. Milenkovic, and B. Vasic, “Generalized low-density parity-check codes for optical communication systems,” J. Lightw. Technol., vol. 23, no. 5, pp. 1939–1946, 2005.
  * [17] M. Bailly, E. Perez. “Pointing, acquisition, and tracking system of the European SILEX program: a major technological step for intersatellite optical communication,” Free-Space Laser Communication Technologies III, Vol. 1417, pp. 142-157, 1991.
  * [18] G. Yue, L. Ping, and X. Wang, “Generalized low-density parity-check codes based on Hadamard constraints,” IEEE Trans. Inf. Theory, vol. 53, no. 3, pp. 1058–1079, 2007.
  * [19] Z. Sun, R. Qi, Z. Lin, L. Yin, G. Long, and J. Lu, “Design and implementation of a practical quantum secure direct communication system,” in Proc. IEEE GlobeCom Conf. Wkshps. IEEE, 2018, pp. 1–6.
  * [20] C. Wang, F. Deng, G., and G. L. Long. “Multi-step quantum secure direct communication using multi-particle Green–Horne–Zeilinger state,” Optics Communications, 253(1-3), 15–20, 2005.
  * [21] P. Maunz, D. Moehring, S. Olmschenk, et al. “Quantum interference of photon pairs from two remote trapped atomic ions,” Nature Phys 3, 538–541, 2007.
  * [22] C. Bennett, H., G. Brassard, C. Crépeau, and U. M. Maurer. “Generalized privacy amplification,” IEEE Transactions on Information Theory, 41(6), 1915-1923, 1995.
  * [23] J. Carter, L., and M. N. Wegman. “Universal classes of hash functions,” Journal of Computer and System Sciences, 18(2), 143-154, 1979.
  * [24] J. Hu, B. Yu, M. Jing, L. Xiao, S. Jia, G. Qin, and G. L. Long. “Experimental quantum secure direct communication with single photons,” Light: Science and Applications, 5(9), e16144, 2016.
  * [25] Z. Babar, P. Botsinis, D. Alanis, S. X. Ng, and L. Hanzo. “Fifteen years of quantum LDPC coding and improved decoding strategies,” IEEE Access, 3, 2492–2519, 2015.
  * [26] Z. Zhou, Y. Sheng, P. Niu, L. Yin, G. Long, and L. Hanzo. “Measurement-device-independent quantum secure direct communication.” Science China Physics, Mechanics and Astronomy, 63(3), 230362, 2020.
  * [27] J. Roffe, ”Towards practical quantum LDPC codes,” Quantum Views, vol. 5, p. 63, Nov. 2021. [Online]. Available: https://doi.org/10.22331/qv-2021-11-30-63
  * [28] M. Ghilea et al., ”Quasi-cyclic multi-edge LDPC codes for long-distance quantum cryptography,” npj Quantum Information, 2021. [Online]. Available: https://www.nature.com/articles/s41534-021-00426-1
  * [29] F. A. Mele, L. Lami, and V. Giovannetti, ”Quantum optical communication in the presence of strong attenuation noise,” Physical Review A, vol. 106, no. 042437, 2022. [Online]. Available: https://link.aps.org/doi/10.1103/PhysRevA.106.042437
  * [30] S. Zafar and H. Khalid, “Free space optical networks: applications, challenges and research directions,” Wireless Personal Communications, vol. 121, no. 1, pp. 429-457, 2021.
  * [31] H. Kaushal, V. K. Jain and S. Kar, “Free-space optical channel models,” in Free Space Optical Communication, New Delhi, India: Springer, 2017, pp. 9-41.
  * [32] A. M. Al-Kinani, A. A. Al-Habash, A. A. Al-Habash and A. A. Al-Habash, “A survey of hybrid free space optics communication networks to overcome atmospheric turbulence,” Entropy, vol. 24, no. 11, p. 1573, 2022.
  * [33] A. Avella et al., “Characterization of free-space quantum channels,” arXiv preprint arXiv:1810.05700, 2018.
  * [34] T. Ye, and Z. Ji, “Multi-user quantum private comparison with scattered preparation and one-way convergent transmission of quantum states”, arXiv preprint arXiv:2205.04631, 2021.
  * [35] M.Xiao, and C. Ma, “Fault-tolerant quantum private comparison protocol”, International Journal of Theoretical Physics, vol. 61, no. 1, p. 41, 2022.
  * [36] J. Liu, Q. Wang, Y. Yang, and Q. Wen, “Quantum private comparison protocol based on high-dimensional quantum states”, Quantum Information Processing, vol. 13, no. 11, pp. 2391-2404, 2014.
  * [37] D. Pan, Z. Lin, J. Wu, H. Zhang, Z. Sun, D. Ruan, L. Lin, G. Long, “Experimental free-space quantum secure direct communication and its security analysis,” Photonics Res, 8(9), 1522–1531, 2020.
  * [38] R. Qi, Y. Zhang, S. Wang, H. Li, Z. Wang, S. Wang, X. Chen, and J.-W. Pan, “Experimental demonstration of free-space quantum secure direct communication with single photons”, Light: Science and Applications, vol. 9, no. 1, p. 28, 2020.
  * [39] G. Vallone, D. Marangon, M. Canale, I. Savorgnan, D. Bacco, M. Barbieri, S. Calimani, C. Barbieri, N. Laurenti, and P. Villoresi, “Adaptive real time selection for quantum key distribution in lossy and turbulent free-space channels”, arXiv preprint arXiv:1404.1272, 2014.
  * [40] L.-C. Xu, H.-Y. Chen, N.-R. Zhou, and L.-H. Gong, “Multi-party semi-quantum secure direct communication protocol with cluster states”, International Journal of Theoretical Physics, vol. 59, no. 6, pp. 2175-2186, 2020.
  * [41] R. Qi et al., “Implementing a practical quantum secure direct communication system,” Light: Science and Applications, vol. 8, no. 1, p. 21, 2019.
  * [42] J.-G. Ren et al., “Ground-to-satellite quantum teleportation,” Nature, vol. 549, no. 7670, pp. 70-73, 2017.
  * [43] S.-K. Liao et al., “Satellite-to-ground quantum key distribution,” Nature, vol. 549, no. 7670, pp. 43-47, 2017.
  * [44] A. V. Khmelev et al., “Semi-Empirical Satellite-to-Ground Quantum Key Distribution Model for Realistic Receivers,” Entropy, vol. 25, no. 4, p. 670, 2023.
  * [45] P. Panteleev and G. Kalachev, “Degenerate Quantum LDPC Codes With Good Finite Length Performance,” Quantum, vol. 5, p. 585, 2021.
  * [46] P. Panteleev and G. Kalachev, “Layered Decoding of Quantum LDPC Codes,” IEEE Transactions on Information Theory, vol. 66, no. 8, pp. 5198-5209, 2020.
  * [47] J. Roffe, “Towards practical quantum LDPC codes,” Quantum Views, vol. 5, p. 63, 2021.
  * [48] M. T. Toledo, “Process Analytical Technology (PAT) - Enhance Quality and Efficiency,” 2021. [Online].
  * [49] J. Wang et al., “Direct and full-scale experimental verifications towards ground-satellite quantum key distribution,” Nature Photonics, vol. 7, no. 5, pp. 387-393, 2013.
  * [50] Z. Cao et al., “Continuous-Variable Quantum Secure Direct Communication Based on Gaussian Mapping,” Physical Review Applied, vol. 16, no. 2, p. 024012, 2021.
  * [51] S. Goswami and S. Dhara, “Satellite Relayed Global Quantum Communication without Quantum Memory,” arXiv:2306.12421, 2021.
  * [52] R. Qi et al., “Practical quantum secure direct communication with polarization encoding,” Light: Science and Applications, vol. 8, no. 1, p. 21, 2019.
  * [53] V. E. Balasubramanian et al., “Quantum communication using satellites,” Journal of Physics: Photonics, vol. 3, no. 3, p. 032001, 2021.
  * [54] E. Perrier, “The Quantum Governance Stack: Models of Governance for Quantum Information Technologies,” Digital Society, vol. 1, no. 1, p. 22, 2022.
  * [55] M. Kop, “Establishing a Legal-Ethical Framework for Quantum Technology,” Yale Journal of Law and Technology, vol. 23, no. 1, pp. 1-40, 2021.
  * [56] D. Pan, X.-T. Song, and G.-L. Long, “Free-Space Quantum Secure Direct Communication: Basics, Progress, and Outlook,” Advanced devices and instrumentation, vol. 4, Jan. 2023, doi: https://doi.org/10.34133/adi.0004.
  * [57] F. Zhu et al., “Experimental long-distance quantum secure direct communication,” arXiv:1710.07951, Oct. 2017.
  * [58] S. Pirandola et al., “Advances in quantum cryptography,” Adv. Opt. Photon., vol. 12, no. 4, pp. 1012–1236, Dec. 2020, doi: 10.1364/AOP.383547.
  * [59] QANplatform, “Quantum-resistant security,” [Online]. Available: https://learn.qanplatform.com/technology/technology-features/quantum-resistant-security.
  * [60] J. Liu et al., “Quantum-secure blockchain with efficient verification based on quantum key distribution,” Sci. Rep., vol. 10, Article 10677, Jul. 2020, doi: 10.1038/s41598-020-67612-3.
  * [61] A. Kayal and S. Mandal, “Quantum secure direct communication using quantum key distribution and quantum encryption,” in Proc. IEEE Int. Conf. Adv. Comput. Commun. Inform. (ICACCI), Bangalore, India, Sep. 2018, pp. 1566–1571, doi: 10.1109/ICACCI.2018.8554768.
  * [62] M. Wang et al., “Quantum secure direct communication based on authentication,” in Proc. IEEE Int. Conf. Wireless Commun. Signal Process. (WCSP), Nanjing, China, Oct. 2008, pp. 1–4, doi: 10.1109/WCSP.2008.4694128.
  * [63] J. Wang et al., “Drone-based entanglement distribution towards mobile quantum networks,” Natl. Sci. Rev., vol. 7, no. 5, pp. 921–930, May 2020, doi: 10.1093/nsr/nwz206.
  * [64] H. Yin et al., “Long-distance and secure quantum key distribution over a free-space channel,” Nat. Photon., vol. 15, pp. 41–45, Jan. 2021, doi: 10.1038/s41566-020-00713-5.
  * [65] M. A. Nielsen and I. L. Chuang, Quantum Computation and Quantum Information, 10th ed. Cambridge, U.K.: Cambridge Univ. Press, 2010.
  * [66] A. K. Patra and S. K. Jana, “A new quantum secure direct communication protocol using decoherence-free subspace,” arXiv:2211.15941, Nov. 2021, [Online]. Available:
  * [67] S. Mexicana De Física et al., “Improved performance of the cryptographic key distillation protocol of an FSO/CV-QKD system on a turbulent channel using an adaptive LDPC encoder,” Revista Mexicana de Física, vol. 63, pp. 268–274, 2017, Accessed: Feb. 08, 2024. [Online]. Available: https://www.redalyc.org/pdf/570/57050507008.pdf
  * [68] J. Yin et al., “Quantum teleportation and entanglement distribution over 100-kilometre free-space channels,” Nature, vol. 488, no. 7410, pp. 185–188, 2012, doi: https://doi.org/10.1038/nature11332.
  * [69] X.-S. Ma et al., “Quantum teleportation using active feed-forward between two Canary Islands,” 2012, Accessed: Feb. 08, 2024. [Online]. Available: https://arxiv.org/pdf/1205.3909.pdf