
2
Section V, and Section VI concludes the paper.
A. Why QKD?
Encryption, the use of secret keys to encrypt or decrypt
information, is now ubiquitous on the internet, to the
point that most people use encryption on a daily basis.
Two of the most common types of encryption used to se-
cure data online are RSA [5] which relies on the multipli-
cation of two large prime numbers for its key generation,
and AES which involves performing several matrix oper-
ations to do the same. There are algorithms for quantum
computers that threaten the security of these methods -
Shor’s algorithm [6] significantly reduces the complexity
of prime number factorisation when compared with clas-
sical computers, and Grover’s algorithm [7] effectively
halves the bit length of keys for brute forcing attacks.
The former poses a significant threat [8] to RSA en-
cryption of all currently used bit lengths, and the latter
greatly reduces the amount of time it would take to cor-
rectly guess an AES key assuming no vulnerabilities for
the method would be discovered.
With technological advances improving the scalability,
fault tolerance, and commercial availability of quantum
computers; it is only a matter of time until cyber crimi-
nals and state actors gain access to them, and until these
encryption methods are rendered insecure. Such nefar-
ious actors need not wait until capable quantum com-
puters are available to decrypt confidential information,
they may already be storing encrypted data to decrypt
later, so quantum-secure encryption methods are critical
at present [8]. Quantum key distribution (QKD) is an
encryption method that relies on the quantum mechani-
cal properties of light for its key generation rather than
mathematical complexity, making it theoretically secure
against attacks from quantum computers [9,10].
While other QKD protocols use the polarisations of en-
tangled photons or time binning to distinguish between
photons, or qubits, that represent a 0 or 1, in ROKS a
symmetric BB84 [11] protocol is used. In the quantum
communications channel, weak coherent pulses (<1 pho-
ton per pulse average) are generated in one of four linear
polarisations at random: horizontal (H) ←→, vertical (V)
l, diagonal (D) .%, or anti-diagonal (A) &-. These po-
larisations are paired off into two polarisation bases with
their orthogonal counterparts - the H-V basis ←l→, and
the D-A basis .%&- - within which one polarisation corre-
sponds to a 1 and the other to a 0. All properties of the
photons other than their polarisations should be identi-
cal so the photons are otherwise indistinguishable from
one another.
After the bits have been sent a reconciliation pro-
cess occurs over classical communication channels, dur-
ing which only the basis in which each photon was sent
is transmitted so the receiver can determine if the pho-
ton was detected in the correct polarisation basis. If the
basis is correct, the qubit has almost certainly been cor-
rectly measured so it is kept; if the basis is incorrect, the
qubit will only be correctly measured 50% of the time,
so this bit is ignored and does not contribute to the final
secret key. Because only single photons are transmitted,
any eavesdroppers can be detected by decreases in the
numbers of detected photons, which can also be stated
as an increase in the quantum bit error rate (QBER).
Eavesdroppers also cannot reliably reproduce photons
they pick off, because there is a 50% probability they
measure each photon in the incorrect polarisation basis.
As well as ‘signal states’ that are kept and contribute
to the final secret key, ‘decoy states’ [12] are also used
for added complexity in case of eavesdroppers. Decoy
states contain all the same information as signal states,
just at a different intensity. During the reconciliation
process over the classical communications channel, the
transmitter declares which pulses were signal and which
were decoy.
Some BB84 QKD solutions are commercially available,
either coupled into free-space or fibre-coupled. The dis-
tances over which these solutions can be used are lim-
ited by atmospheric losses [13] and fibre attenuation [14],
respectively. Using satellites from various Earth orbits
should overcome these limits [15–17] as this can offer
global reach, and the atmosphere exists at relatively low
altitudes for some of which its density is reduced, limit-
ing atmospheric losses [18,19]. The ROKS mission aims
to demonstrate the feasibility of supplying quantum keys
from CubeSats in LEO [20], with the potential for con-
stellations in future to reduce lapses in coverage at com-
patible ground stations [21–23].
B. MISSION GOALS
ROKS is a demonstrator mission both for the devices de-
veloped for the platform, and the services that these de-
vices can provide. The main mission goals are to demon-
strate that QKD technology can be successfully imple-
mented on a CubeSat [16,24], and to demonstrate that
onboard intelligence can be used to deliver mission au-
tonomy and improve utility of a potential CubeSat QKD
service.
II. MISSION PAYLOAD
The ROKS payload consists of 5 modular hardware sub-
systems, described below. The quantum source (JADE)
and acquisition, pointing, and tracking (APATITE) com-
ponents were designed and manufactured in conjunction
with mission partners University of Bristol (UoB) and
University of Strathclyde (UoS). The optical telescope
(GARNET) was developed by Fraunhofer Centre for Ap-
plied Photonics (FhCAP), and licensed to CPL for com-
mercialisation. Each of these modules is shown in its
position in the CubeSat structure in Fig. 1.
JADE: The JADE quantum source combines opti-