Results 1  10
of
862
A New Kind of Science
, 2002
"... “Somebody says, ‘You know, you people always say that space is continuous. How do you know when you get to a small enough dimension that there really are enough points in between, that it isn’t just a lot of dots separated by little distances? ’ Or they say, ‘You know those quantum mechanical amplit ..."
Abstract

Cited by 893 (0 self)
 Add to MetaCart
(Show Context)
“Somebody says, ‘You know, you people always say that space is continuous. How do you know when you get to a small enough dimension that there really are enough points in between, that it isn’t just a lot of dots separated by little distances? ’ Or they say, ‘You know those quantum mechanical amplitudes you told me about, they’re so complicated and absurd, what makes you think those are right? Maybe they aren’t right. ’ Such remarks are obvious and are perfectly clear to anybody who is working on this problem. It does not do any good to point this out.” —Richard Feynman [1, p.161]
Entity Authentication and Key Distribution
, 1993
"... Entity authentication and key distribution are central cryptographic problems in distributed computing  but up until now, they have lacked even a meaningful definition. One consequence is that incorrect and inefficient protocols have proliferated. This paper provides the first treatment of these p ..."
Abstract

Cited by 578 (13 self)
 Add to MetaCart
Entity authentication and key distribution are central cryptographic problems in distributed computing  but up until now, they have lacked even a meaningful definition. One consequence is that incorrect and inefficient protocols have proliferated. This paper provides the first treatment of these problems in the complexitytheoretic framework of modern cryptography. Addressed in detail are two problems of the symmetric, twoparty setting: mutual authentication and authenticated key exchange. For each we present a definition, protocol, and proof that the protocol meets its goal, assuming the (minimal) assumption of pseudorandom function. When this assumption is appropriately instantiated, the protocols given are practical and efficient.
Private Information Retrieval
"... We describe schemes that enable a user to access k replicated copies of a database ( k * 2) and privately retrieve informationstored in the database. This means that each individual database gets no information on the identity of the item retrieved by the user. For a single database, achieving thi ..."
Abstract

Cited by 558 (14 self)
 Add to MetaCart
We describe schemes that enable a user to access k replicated copies of a database ( k * 2) and privately retrieve informationstored in the database. This means that each individual database gets no information on the identity of the item retrieved by the user. For a single database, achieving this type of privacy requires communicating the whole database, or n bits (where n is the number of bits in the database). Our schemes use the replication to gain substantial saving. In particular, we have ffl A two database scheme with communication complexity of O(n1=3).ffl
Fuzzy extractors: How to generate strong keys from biometrics and other noisy data
, 2008
"... We provide formal definitions and efficient secure techniques for • turning noisy information into keys usable for any cryptographic application, and, in particular, • reliably and securely authenticating biometric data. Our techniques apply not just to biometric information, but to any keying mater ..."
Abstract

Cited by 535 (38 self)
 Add to MetaCart
We provide formal definitions and efficient secure techniques for • turning noisy information into keys usable for any cryptographic application, and, in particular, • reliably and securely authenticating biometric data. Our techniques apply not just to biometric information, but to any keying material that, unlike traditional cryptographic keys, is (1) not reproducible precisely and (2) not distributed uniformly. We propose two primitives: a fuzzy extractor reliably extracts nearly uniform randomness R from its input; the extraction is errortolerant in the sense that R will be the same even if the input changes, as long as it remains reasonably close to the original. Thus, R can be used as a key in a cryptographic application. A secure sketch produces public information about its input w that does not reveal w, and yet allows exact recovery of w given another value that is close to w. Thus, it can be used to reliably reproduce errorprone biometric inputs without incurring the security risk inherent in storing them. We define the primitives to be both formally secure and versatile, generalizing much prior work. In addition, we provide nearly optimal constructions of both primitives for various measures of “closeness” of input data, such as Hamming distance, edit distance, and set difference.
Relations among notions of security for publickey encryption schemes
, 1998
"... Abstract. We compare the relative strengths of popular notions of security for public key encryption schemes. We consider the goals of privacy and nonmalleability, each under chosen plaintext attack and two kinds of chosen ciphertext attack. For each of the resulting pairs of definitions we prove e ..."
Abstract

Cited by 517 (69 self)
 Add to MetaCart
(Show Context)
Abstract. We compare the relative strengths of popular notions of security for public key encryption schemes. We consider the goals of privacy and nonmalleability, each under chosen plaintext attack and two kinds of chosen ciphertext attack. For each of the resulting pairs of definitions we prove either an implication (every scheme meeting one notion must meet the other) or a separation (there is a scheme meeting one notion but not the other, assuming the first notion can be met at all). We similarly treat plaintext awareness, a notion of security in the random oracle model. An additional contribution of this paper is a new definition of nonmalleability which we believe is simpler than the previous one.
NonMalleable Cryptography
 SIAM Journal on Computing
, 2000
"... The notion of nonmalleable cryptography, an extension of semantically secure cryptography, is defined. Informally, in the context of encryption the additional requirement is that given the ciphertext it is impossible to generate a different ciphertext so that the respective plaintexts are related. ..."
Abstract

Cited by 480 (20 self)
 Add to MetaCart
(Show Context)
The notion of nonmalleable cryptography, an extension of semantically secure cryptography, is defined. Informally, in the context of encryption the additional requirement is that given the ciphertext it is impossible to generate a different ciphertext so that the respective plaintexts are related. The same concept makes sense in the contexts of string commitment and zeroknowledge proofs of possession of knowledge. Nonmalleable schemes for each of these three problems are presented. The schemes do not assume a trusted center; a user need not know anything about the number or identity of other system users. Our cryptosystem is the first proven to be secure against a strong type of chosen ciphertext attack proposed by Rackoff and Simon, in which the attacker knows the ciphertext she wishes to break and can query the decryption oracle on any ciphertext other than the target.
A Concrete Security Treatment of Symmetric Encryption
 Proceedings of the 38th Symposium on Foundations of Computer Science, IEEE
, 1997
"... We study notions and schemes for symmetric (ie. private key) encryption in a concrete security framework. We give four di erent notions of security against chosen plaintext attack and analyze the concrete complexity ofreductions among them, providing both upper and lower bounds, and obtaining tight ..."
Abstract

Cited by 421 (65 self)
 Add to MetaCart
(Show Context)
We study notions and schemes for symmetric (ie. private key) encryption in a concrete security framework. We give four di erent notions of security against chosen plaintext attack and analyze the concrete complexity ofreductions among them, providing both upper and lower bounds, and obtaining tight relations. In this way we classify notions (even though polynomially reducible to each other) as stronger or weaker in terms of concrete security. Next we provide concrete security analyses of methods to encrypt using a block cipher, including the most popular encryption method, CBC. We establish tight bounds (meaning
On the (im)possibility of obfuscating programs
 Lecture Notes in Computer Science
, 2001
"... Informally, an obfuscator O is an (efficient, probabilistic) “compiler ” that takes as input a program (or circuit) P and produces a new program O(P) that has the same functionality as P yet is “unintelligible ” in some sense. Obfuscators, if they exist, would have a wide variety of cryptographic an ..."
Abstract

Cited by 348 (24 self)
 Add to MetaCart
Informally, an obfuscator O is an (efficient, probabilistic) “compiler ” that takes as input a program (or circuit) P and produces a new program O(P) that has the same functionality as P yet is “unintelligible ” in some sense. Obfuscators, if they exist, would have a wide variety of cryptographic and complexitytheoretic applications, ranging from software protection to homomorphic encryption to complexitytheoretic analogues of Rice’s theorem. Most of these applications are based on an interpretation of the “unintelligibility ” condition in obfuscation as meaning that O(P) is a “virtual black box, ” in the sense that anything one can efficiently compute given O(P), one could also efficiently compute given oracle access to P. In this work, we initiate a theoretical investigation of obfuscation. Our main result is that, even under very weak formalizations of the above intuition, obfuscation is impossible. We prove this by constructing a family of efficient programs P that are unobfuscatable in the sense that (a) given any efficient program P ′ that computes the same function as a program P ∈ P, the “source code ” P can be efficiently reconstructed, yet (b) given oracle access to a (randomly selected) program P ∈ P, no efficient algorithm can reconstruct P (or even distinguish a certain bit in the code from random) except with negligible probability. We extend our impossibility result in a number of ways, including even obfuscators that (a) are not necessarily computable in polynomial time, (b) only approximately preserve the functionality, and (c) only need to work for very restricted models of computation (TC 0). We also rule out several potential applications of obfuscators, by constructing “unobfuscatable” signature schemes, encryption schemes, and pseudorandom function families.
Generalized privacy amplification
 IEEE Transactions on Information Theory
, 1995
"... Abstract This paper provides a general treatment of privacy amplification by public discussion, a concept introduced by Bennett, Brassard, and Robert for a special scenario. Privacy amplification is a process that allows two parties to distill a secret key from a common random variable about which ..."
Abstract

Cited by 325 (19 self)
 Add to MetaCart
Abstract This paper provides a general treatment of privacy amplification by public discussion, a concept introduced by Bennett, Brassard, and Robert for a special scenario. Privacy amplification is a process that allows two parties to distill a secret key from a common random variable about which an eavesdropper has partial information. The two parties generally know nothing about the eavesdropper’s information except that it satisfies a certain constraint. The results have applications to unconditionally secure secretkey agreement protocols and quantum cryptography, and they yield results on wiretap and broadcast channels for a considerably strengthened definition of secrecy capacity. Index Terms Cryptography, secretkey agreement, unconditional security, privacy amplification, wiretap channel, secrecy capacity, RCnyi entropy, universal hashing, quantum cryptography. I.
Software Protection and Simulation on Oblivious RAMs
, 1993
"... Software protection is one of the most important issues concerning computer practice. There exist many heuristics and adhoc methods for protection, but the problem as a whole has not received the theoretical treatment it deserves. In this paper we provide theoretical treatment of software protectio ..."
Abstract

Cited by 312 (15 self)
 Add to MetaCart
Software protection is one of the most important issues concerning computer practice. There exist many heuristics and adhoc methods for protection, but the problem as a whole has not received the theoretical treatment it deserves. In this paper we provide theoretical treatment of software protection. We reduce the problem of software protection to the problem of efficient simulation on oblivious RAM. A machine is oblivious if the sequence in which it accesses memory locations is equivalent for any two inputs with the same running time. For example, an oblivious Turing Machine is one for which the movement of the heads on the tapes is identical for each computation. (Thus, it is independent of the actual input.) What is the slowdown in the running time of any machine, if it is required to be oblivious? In 1979 Pippenger and Fischer showed how a twotape oblivious Turing Machine can simulate, online, a onetape Turing Machine, with a logarithmic slowdown in the running time. We s...