Design and Analysis of Opaque Signatures

Digital signatures were introduced to guarantee the authenticity and integrity of the underlying messages. A digital signature scheme comprises the key generation, the signature, and the verification algorithms. The key generation algorithm creates the signing and the verifying keys, called also the signer’s private and public keys respectively. The signature algorithm, which is run by the signer, produces a signature on the input message. Finally, the verification algorithm, run by anyone who knows the signer’s public key, checks whether a purported signature on some message is valid or not. The last property, namely the universal verification of digital signatures is undesirable in situations where the signed data is commercially or personally sensitive. Therefore, mechanisms which share most properties with digital signatures except for the universal verification were invented to respond to the aforementioned need; we call such mechanisms “opaque signatures”. In this thesis, we study the signatures where the verification cannot be achieved without the cooperation of a specific entity, namely the signer in case of undeniable signatures, or the confirmer in case of confirmer signatures; we make three main contributions. We first study the relationship between two security properties important for public key encryption, namely data privacy and key privacy. Our study is motivated by the fact that opaque signatures involve always an encryption layer that ensures their opacity. The properties required for this encryption vary according to whether we want to protect the identity (i.e. the key) of the signer or hide the validity of the signature. Therefore, it would be convenient to use existing work about the encryption scheme in order to derive one notion from the other. Next, we delve into the generic constructions of confirmer signatures from basic cryptographic primitives, e.g. digital signatures, encryption, or commitment schemes. In fact, generic constructions give easy-to-understand and easy-to-prove schemes, however, this convenience is often achieved at the expense of efficiency. In this contribution, which constitutes the core of this thesis, we first analyze the already existing constructions; our study concludes that the popular generic constructions of confirmer signatures necessitate strong security assumptions on the building blocks, which impacts negatively the efficiency of the resulting signatures. Next, we show that a small change in these constructionsmakes these assumptions drop drastically, allowing as a result constructions with instantiations that compete with the dedicated realizations of these signatures. Finally, we revisit two early undeniable signatures which were proposed with a conjectural security. We disprove the claimed security of the first scheme, and we provide a fix to it in order to achieve strong security properties. Next, we upgrade the second scheme so that it supports a iii desirable feature, and we provide a formal security treatment of the new scheme: we prove that it is secure assuming new reasonable assumptions on the underlying constituents

Preserving transparency and accountability in optimistic fair exchange of digital signatures

Optimistic fair exchange (OFE) protocols are useful tools for two participants to fairly exchange items with the aid of a third party who is only involved if needed. A widely accepted requirement is that the third party\u27s involvement in the exchange must be transparent, to protect privacy and avoid bad publicity. At the same time, a dishonest third party would compromise the fairness of the exchange and the third party thus must be responsible for its behaviors. This is achieved in OFE protocols with another property called accountability. It is unfortunate that the accountability has never been formally studied in OFE since its introduction ten years ago. In this paper, we fill these gaps by giving the first complete definition of accountability in OFE where one of the exchanged items is a digital signature and a generic (also the first) design of OFE where transparency and accountability coexist

Critical Perspectives on Provable Security: Fifteen Years of Another Look Papers

We give an overview of our critiques of “proofs” of security and a guide to our papers on the subject that have appeared over the past decade and a half. We also provide numerous additional examples and a few updates and errata

Research Philosophy of Modern Cryptography

Proposing novel cryptography schemes (e.g., encryption, signatures, and protocols) is one of the main research goals in modern cryptography. In this paper, based on more than 800 research papers since 1976 that we have surveyed, we introduce the research philosophy of cryptography behind these papers. We use ``benefits and ``novelty as the keywords to introduce the research philosophy of proposing new schemes, assuming that there is already one scheme proposed for a cryptography notion. Next, we introduce how benefits were explored in the literature and we have categorized the methodology into 3 ways for benefits, 6 types of benefits, and 17 benefit areas. As examples, we introduce 40 research strategies within these benefit areas that were invented in the literature. The introduced research strategies have covered most cryptography schemes published in top-tier cryptography conferences

Cryptography in privacy-preserving applications.

Tsang Pak Kong.Thesis (M.Phil.)--Chinese University of Hong Kong, 2005.Includes bibliographical references (leaves 95-107).Abstracts in English and Chinese.Abstract --- p.iiAcknowledgement --- p.ivChapter 1 --- Introduction --- p.1Chapter 1.1 --- Privacy --- p.1Chapter 1.2 --- Cryptography --- p.5Chapter 1.2.1 --- History of Cryptography --- p.5Chapter 1.2.2 --- Cryptography Today --- p.6Chapter 1.2.3 --- Cryptography For Privacy --- p.7Chapter 1.3 --- Thesis Organization --- p.8Chapter 2 --- Background --- p.10Chapter 2.1 --- Notations --- p.10Chapter 2.2 --- Complexity Theory --- p.11Chapter 2.2.1 --- Order Notation --- p.11Chapter 2.2.2 --- Algorithms and Protocols --- p.11Chapter 2.2.3 --- Relations and Languages --- p.13Chapter 2.3 --- Algebra and Number Theory --- p.14Chapter 2.3.1 --- Groups --- p.14Chapter 2.3.2 --- Intractable Problems --- p.16Chapter 2.4 --- Cryptographic Primitives --- p.18Chapter 2.4.1 --- Public-Key Encryption --- p.18Chapter 2.4.2 --- Identification Protocols --- p.21Chapter 2.4.3 --- Digital Signatures --- p.22Chapter 2.4.4 --- Hash Functions --- p.24Chapter 2.4.5 --- Zero-Knowledge Proof of Knowledge --- p.26Chapter 2.4.6 --- Accumulators --- p.32Chapter 2.4.7 --- Public Key Infrastructure --- p.34Chapter 2.5 --- Zero Knowledge Proof of Knowledge Protocols in Groups of Unknown Order --- p.36Chapter 2.5.1 --- The Algebraic Setting --- p.36Chapter 2.5.2 --- Proving the Knowledge of Several Discrete Logarithms . --- p.37Chapter 2.5.3 --- Proving the Knowledge of a Representation --- p.38Chapter 2.5.4 --- Proving the Knowledge of d Out of n Equalities of Discrete Logarithms --- p.39Chapter 2.6 --- Conclusion --- p.42Chapter 3 --- Related Works --- p.43Chapter 3.1 --- Introduction --- p.43Chapter 3.2 --- Group-Oriented Signatures without Spontaneity and/or Anonymity --- p.44Chapter 3.3 --- SAG Signatures --- p.46Chapter 3.4 --- Conclusion --- p.49Chapter 4 --- Linkable Ring Signatures --- p.50Chapter 4.1 --- Introduction --- p.50Chapter 4.2 --- New Notions --- p.52Chapter 4.2.1 --- Accusatory Linking --- p.52Chapter 4.2.2 --- Non-slanderability --- p.53Chapter 4.2.3 --- Linkability in Threshold Ring Signatures --- p.54Chapter 4.2.4 --- Event-Oriented Linking --- p.55Chapter 4.3 --- Security Model --- p.56Chapter 4.3.1 --- Syntax --- p.56Chapter 4.3.2 --- Notions of Security --- p.58Chapter 4.4 --- Conclusion --- p.63Chapter 5 --- Short Linkable Ring Signatures --- p.64Chapter 5.1 --- Introduction --- p.64Chapter 5.2 --- The Construction --- p.65Chapter 5.3 --- Security Analysis --- p.68Chapter 5.3.1 --- Security Theorems --- p.68Chapter 5.3.2 --- Proofs --- p.68Chapter 5.4 --- Discussion --- p.70Chapter 5.5 --- Conclusion --- p.71Chapter 6 --- Separable Linkable Threshold Ring Signatures --- p.72Chapter 6.1 --- Introduction --- p.72Chapter 6.2 --- The Construction --- p.74Chapter 6.3 --- Security Analysis --- p.76Chapter 6.3.1 --- Security Theorems --- p.76Chapter 6.3.2 --- Proofs --- p.77Chapter 6.4 --- Discussion --- p.79Chapter 6.5 --- Conclusion --- p.80Chapter 7 --- Applications --- p.82Chapter 7.1 --- Offline Anonymous Electronic Cash --- p.83Chapter 7.1.1 --- Introduction --- p.83Chapter 7.1.2 --- Construction --- p.84Chapter 7.2 --- Electronic Voting --- p.85Chapter 7.2.1 --- Introduction --- p.85Chapter 7.2.2 --- Construction . --- p.87Chapter 7.2.3 --- Discussions --- p.88Chapter 7.3 --- Anonymous Attestation --- p.89Chapter 7.3.1 --- Introduction --- p.89Chapter 7.3.2 --- Construction --- p.90Chapter 7.4 --- Conclusion --- p.91Chapter 8 --- Conclusion --- p.92A Paper Derivation --- p.94Bibliography --- p.9

Verifiably encrypted cascade-instantiable blank signatures to secure progressive decision management

National Research Foundation (NRF) Singapore under NC

20th Annual Conference on Legal Issues for Financial Institutions

Program and materials from the 20th Annual Legal Issues for Financial Institutions Conference held by UK/CLE in April of 2000

A new generic construction of anonymous designated confirmer signature for privacy-preserving fair exchange

Designated confirmer signature (DCS), introduced by Chaum at Eurocrypt 1994, can be used to control the public verifiability of a digital signature. It is a very useful tool in many applications which require a signature to remain anonymous and unverifiable until a certain time/condition is reached. In this paper, we propose a new generic construction of Anonymous Identity-Based DCS from Anonymous Identity-Based Signature. Interestingly, our construction also automatically implies an Anonymous Identity-Based Convertible Undeniable Signature scheme. We prove that the construction is secure for signer, verifier and confirmer in the standard model