It seems that neural cryptography is an interesting research topic and there are some important contributions published in the last years.

The proposed algorithms are suitable for symmetric key generation starting from the common hidden weights, thus representing a possible Diffie-Hellman substitute.

As far as I understood, the main advantages are that Tree Parity Machines are quantum resistant and their hardware implementation is simpler when compared to DH.

So my question is: is this enough to switch to neural cryptography in practical use cases? Or does the scientific community consider TPMs only a trend, because of perceptrons? Or is it unsafe to deploy TPMs because more search is required in this topic? And about common public inputs: in practical implementations is it a threat or it is required to keep them secret to yield authentication?

Thanks in advance.

  • 3
    $\begingroup$ Please give a reference to that source suggesting Tree Parity Machine as a quantum-resistant alternative to DH. Update 2: I removed the TPM tag, which refers to Trusted Platform Module, not Tree Parity Machines. $\endgroup$
    – fgrieu
    Apr 21, 2022 at 18:57

1 Answer 1


After like an hour of search on the subject of Tree Parity Machines as an alternative to Diffie-Hellman key exchange, I found that:

For followups, I recommend reading the free abstract of this paywalled 2012 survey article.

Count me as skeptical on first exposure to the whole idea, and also about the quality of some of the followup articles which cite the original but not it's refutation.


Your Answer

By clicking “Post Your Answer”, you agree to our terms of service and acknowledge you have read our privacy policy.

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged or ask your own question.