Results 1  10
of
26
A Digital Signature Scheme Secure Against Adaptive ChosenMessage Attacks
, 1995
"... We present a digital signature scheme based on the computational diculty of integer factorization. The scheme possesses the novel property of being robust against an adaptive chosenmessage attack: an adversary who receives signatures for messages of his choice (where each message may be chosen in a ..."
Abstract

Cited by 827 (48 self)
 Add to MetaCart
We present a digital signature scheme based on the computational diculty of integer factorization. The scheme possesses the novel property of being robust against an adaptive chosenmessage attack: an adversary who receives signatures for messages of his choice (where each message may be chosen in a way that depends on the signatures of previously chosen messages) can not later forge the signature of even a single additional message. This may be somewhat surprising, since the properties of having forgery being equivalent to factoring and being invulnerable to an adaptive chosenmessage attack were considered in the folklore to be contradictory. More generally, we show how to construct a signature scheme with such properties based on the existence of a "clawfree" pair of permutations  a potentially weaker assumption than the intractibility of integer factorization. The new scheme is potentially practical: signing and verifying signatures are reasonably fast, and signatures are compact.
Security Arguments for Digital Signatures and Blind Signatures
 JOURNAL OF CRYPTOLOGY
, 2000
"... Since the appearance of publickey cryptography in the seminal DiffieHellman paper, many new schemes have been proposed and many have been broken. Thus, the ..."
Abstract

Cited by 278 (35 self)
 Add to MetaCart
Since the appearance of publickey cryptography in the seminal DiffieHellman paper, many new schemes have been proposed and many have been broken. Thus, the
Limits on the Provable Consequences of Oneway Permutations
, 1989
"... We present strong evidence that the implication, "if oneway permutations exist, then secure secret key agreement is possible" is not provable by standard techniques. Since both sides of this implication are widely believed true in real life, to show that the implication is false requires a new m ..."
Abstract

Cited by 162 (0 self)
 Add to MetaCart
We present strong evidence that the implication, "if oneway permutations exist, then secure secret key agreement is possible" is not provable by standard techniques. Since both sides of this implication are widely believed true in real life, to show that the implication is false requires a new model. We consider a world where dl parties have access to a black box or a randomly selected permutation. Being totally random, this permutation will be strongly oneway in provable, informationthevretic way. We show that, if P = NP, no protocol for secret key agreement is secure in such setting. Thus, to prove that a secret key greement protocol which uses a oneway permutation as a black box is secure is as hrd as proving F NP. We also obtain, as corollary, that there is an oracle relative to which the implication is false, i.e., there is a oneway permutation, yet secretexchange is impossible. Thus, no technique which relativizes can prove that secret exchange can be based on any oneway permutation. Our results present a general framework for proving statements of the form, "Cryptographic application X is not likely possible based solely on complexity assumption Y." 1
A note on efficient zeroknowledge proofs and arguments (Extended Abstract)
, 1992
"... In this note, we present new zeroknowledge interactive proofs and arguments for languages in NP. To show that z G L, with an error probability of at most 2k, our zeroknowledge proof system requires O(lzlc’) + O(lg ” l~l)k ideal bit commitments, where c1 and cz depend only on L. This construction ..."
Abstract

Cited by 146 (2 self)
 Add to MetaCart
In this note, we present new zeroknowledge interactive proofs and arguments for languages in NP. To show that z G L, with an error probability of at most 2k, our zeroknowledge proof system requires O(lzlc’) + O(lg ” l~l)k ideal bit commitments, where c1 and cz depend only on L. This construction is the first in the ideal bit commitment model that achieves large values of k more efficiently than by running k independent iterations of the base interactive proof system. Under suitable complexity assumptions, we exhibit a zeroknowledge arguments that require O(lg ’ Izl)ki bits of communication, where c depends only on L, and 1 is the security parameter for the prover.l This is the first construction in which the total amount of communication can be less than that needed to transmit the NP witness. Our protocols are based on efficiently checkable proofs for NP [4].
Another Look at “Provable Security"
, 2004
"... We give an informal analysis and critique of several typical “provable security” results. In some cases there are intuitive but convincing arguments for rejecting the conclusions suggested by the formal terminology and “proofs,” whereas in other cases the formalism seems to be consistent with common ..."
Abstract

Cited by 59 (12 self)
 Add to MetaCart
We give an informal analysis and critique of several typical “provable security” results. In some cases there are intuitive but convincing arguments for rejecting the conclusions suggested by the formal terminology and “proofs,” whereas in other cases the formalism seems to be consistent with common sense. We discuss the reasons why the search for mathematically convincing theoretical evidence to support the security of publickey systems has been an important theme of researchers. But we argue that the theoremproof paradigm of theoretical mathematics is often of limited relevance here and frequently leads to papers that are confusing and misleading. Because our paper is aimed at the general mathematical public, it is selfcontained and as jargonfree as possible.
Automated Security Proofs with Sequences of Games
 Proc. 27th IEEE Symposium on Security
, 2006
"... Abstract. This paper presents the first automatic technique for proving not only protocols but also primitives in the exact security computational model. Automatic proofs of cryptographic protocols were up to now reserved to the DolevYao model, which however makes quite strong assumptions on the pr ..."
Abstract

Cited by 40 (7 self)
 Add to MetaCart
Abstract. This paper presents the first automatic technique for proving not only protocols but also primitives in the exact security computational model. Automatic proofs of cryptographic protocols were up to now reserved to the DolevYao model, which however makes quite strong assumptions on the primitives. On the other hand, with the proofs by reductions, in the complexity theoretic framework, more subtle security assumptions can be considered, but security analyses are manual. A process calculus is thus defined in order to take into account the probabilistic semantics of the computational model. It is already rich enough to describe all the usual security notions of both symmetric and asymmetric cryptography, as well as the basic computational assumptions. As an example, we illustrate the use of the new tool with the proof of a quite famous asymmetric primitive: unforgeability under chosenmessage attacks (UFCMA) of the FullDomain Hash signature scheme under the (trapdoor)onewayness of some permutations. 1
Ripping Coins for a Fair Exchange
 Advances in Cryptology  Proceedings of Eurocrypt '95
, 1995
"... A fair exchange of payments for goods and services is a barter where one of the parties cannot obtain the item desired without handing over the item he offered. We introduce the concept of ripping digital coins to solve fairness problems in payment transactions. We demonstrate how to implement coin ..."
Abstract

Cited by 32 (3 self)
 Add to MetaCart
A fair exchange of payments for goods and services is a barter where one of the parties cannot obtain the item desired without handing over the item he offered. We introduce the concept of ripping digital coins to solve fairness problems in payment transactions. We demonstrate how to implement coin ripping for a recently proposed payment scheme [9, 8], giving a practical and transparent coin ripping scheme. We then give a general solution that can be used in any payment scheme with a challenge. We also indicate how fairness can be obtained by building a contract into the coin.
Design Validations for Discrete Logarithm Based Signature Schemes
 In PKC ’00, LNCS 1751
, 2000
"... Abstract. A number of signature schemes and standards have been recently designed, based on the Discrete Logarithm problem. In this paper we conduct design validation of such schemes while trying to minimize the use of ideal hash functions. We consider several Discrete Logarithm (DSAlike) signature ..."
Abstract

Cited by 25 (3 self)
 Add to MetaCart
Abstract. A number of signature schemes and standards have been recently designed, based on the Discrete Logarithm problem. In this paper we conduct design validation of such schemes while trying to minimize the use of ideal hash functions. We consider several Discrete Logarithm (DSAlike) signatures abstracted as generic schemes. We show that the following holds: “if the schemes can be broken by an existential forgery using an adaptively chosenmessage attack then either the discrete logarithm problem can be solved, or some hash function can be distinguished from an ideal one, or multicollisions can be found. ” Thus, for these signature schemes, either they are equivalent to the discrete logarithm problem or there is an attack that takes advantage of properties which are not desired (or expected) in strong practical hash functions (SHA1 or whichever high quality cryptographic hash function is used). What is interesting is that the schemes we discuss include KCDSA and slight variations of DSA. Further, since our schemes coincide with (or are extremely close to) their standard counterparts they benefit from their desired properties: efficiency of computation/space, employment of certain mathematical operations and wide applicability to various algebraic
A Simple PublicKey Cryptosystem with a Double Trapdoor Decryption Mechanism and its Applications
 In Asiacrypt ’03, LNCS 2894
, 2003
"... Abstract. At Eurocrypt ’02 Cramer and Shoup [7] proposed a general paradigm to construct practical publickey cryptosystems secure against adaptive chosenciphertext attacks as well as several concrete examples. Among the others they presented a variant of Paillier’s [21] scheme achieving such a str ..."
Abstract

Cited by 23 (3 self)
 Add to MetaCart
Abstract. At Eurocrypt ’02 Cramer and Shoup [7] proposed a general paradigm to construct practical publickey cryptosystems secure against adaptive chosenciphertext attacks as well as several concrete examples. Among the others they presented a variant of Paillier’s [21] scheme achieving such a strong security requirement and for which two, independent, decryption mechanisms are allowed. In this paper we revisit such scheme and show that by considering a different subgroup, one can obtain a different scheme (whose security can be proved with respect to a different mathematical assumption) that allows for interesting applications. In particular we show how to construct a perfectly hiding commitment schemes that allows for an online / offline efficiency tradeoff. The scheme is computationally binding under the assumption that factoring is hard, thus improving on the previous construction by Catalano et al. [5] whose binding property was based on the assumption that inverting RSA[N, N] (i.e. RSA with the public exponent set to N) is hard. 1
Privacy vs. Authenticity
, 1997
"... : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : viii I Introduction : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : 1 A. The Need for Balanced EMoney Systems : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : 1 1. Outline : : : : : : : : : : : : : : ..."
Abstract

Cited by 14 (4 self)
 Add to MetaCart
: : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : viii I Introduction : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : 1 A. The Need for Balanced EMoney Systems : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : 1 1. Outline : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : 2 2. What we achieve : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : 3 3. Avoiding abuse : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : 4 4. Method : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : 5 5. Tools for Privacy and Authenticity : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : 6 6. Tools for Robustness : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : 7 B. Related Work : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : 7 II A Versatile and Efficient EMoney Scheme : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : 11 A. System Model : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : ...