Demonstrates improved accuracy in detecting signalling fraud in 5G roaming networks, suggesting enhanced security measures.
Signalling traffic in 5G Interconnect and Roaming Networks (IRNs) over the IP eXchange (IPX) faces man-in-the-middle (MITM) interception on N32 and GTP-U, billing fraud, and “Harvest Now, Decrypt Later” (HNDL) adversaries. This paper develops and validates qSiP, a hybrid quantum–classical framework integrating Quantum Key Distribution (QKD, BB84 decoy-state protocol) and Quantum Secure Direct Communication (QSDC, DL04) at OSI Layers 1–2 with a classical-plus-quantum ML classifier for signalling anomaly and billing-fraud detection. Evaluation spans NS-3, Mininet, and MicroK8s on a dual-PLMN Open5GS testbed with PacketRusher NB-IoT traffic and STRIDE-L threat modelling. Cryptographically, qSiP holds BB84 QBER within decoy-state thresholds, sustains key rates matched to N32 timing, and under HNDL conditions bounds adversary exposure to one key-rotation interval; N32 captures confirm 3GPP message format and handshake semantics end-to-end. For detection, the Hybrid configuration reaches 98.5–99.5% accuracy across environments (vs. 89.4–96.0% classical), reduces undetected billing fraud over four roaming paths, and adds under 5 ms latency per signalling exchange. Statistical tests confirm hybrid > classical at p < 0.05 across eMBB, uRLLC, mMTC, and BCE. The work contributes an integrated framework with simulation-based empirical validation in a standards-aligned 5G SA testbed and a methodological commitment for future quantum-roaming research: quantum ML detects but does not encrypt, while QKD/QSDC encrypt does not classify; these are two complementary, non-interchangeable roles.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Ngobeni et al. (2026) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: