1,677 research outputs found

    Concurrently Non-Malleable Zero Knowledge in the Authenticated Public-Key Model

    Full text link
    We consider a type of zero-knowledge protocols that are of interest for their practical applications within networks like the Internet: efficient zero-knowledge arguments of knowledge that remain secure against concurrent man-in-the-middle attacks. In an effort to reduce the setup assumptions required for efficient zero-knowledge arguments of knowledge that remain secure against concurrent man-in-the-middle attacks, we consider a model, which we call the Authenticated Public-Key (APK) model. The APK model seems to significantly reduce the setup assumptions made by the CRS model (as no trusted party or honest execution of a centralized algorithm are required), and can be seen as a slightly stronger variation of the Bare Public-Key (BPK) model from \cite{CGGM,MR}, and a weaker variation of the registered public-key model used in \cite{BCNP}. We then define and study man-in-the-middle attacks in the APK model. Our main result is a constant-round concurrent non-malleable zero-knowledge argument of knowledge for any polynomial-time relation (associated to a language in NP\mathcal{NP}), under the (minimal) assumption of the existence of a one-way function family. Furthermore,We show time-efficient instantiations of our protocol based on known number-theoretic assumptions. We also note a negative result with respect to further reducing the setup assumptions of our protocol to those in the (unauthenticated) BPK model, by showing that concurrently non-malleable zero-knowledge arguments of knowledge in the BPK model are only possible for trivial languages

    Concurrent Knowledge-Extraction in the Public-Key Model

    Get PDF
    Knowledge extraction is a fundamental notion, modelling machine possession of values (witnesses) in a computational complexity sense. The notion provides an essential tool for cryptographic protocol design and analysis, enabling one to argue about the internal state of protocol players without ever looking at this supposedly secret state. However, when transactions are concurrent (e.g., over the Internet) with players possessing public-keys (as is common in cryptography), assuring that entities ``know'' what they claim to know, where adversaries may be well coordinated across different transactions, turns out to be much more subtle and in need of re-examination. Here, we investigate how to formally treat knowledge possession by parties (with registered public-keys) interacting over the Internet. Stated more technically, we look into the relative power of the notion of ``concurrent knowledge-extraction'' (CKE) in the concurrent zero-knowledge (CZK) bare public-key (BPK) model.Comment: 38 pages, 4 figure

    New-Age Cryptography

    Get PDF
    We introduce new and general complexity theoretic hardness assumptions. These assumptions abstract out concrete properties of a random oracle and are significantly stronger than traditional cryptographic hardness assumptions; however, assuming their validity we can resolve a number of longstandingopen problems in cryptography

    Constant-Round Concurrent Non-Malleable Zero Knowledge in the Bare Public-Key Model

    Get PDF
    One of the central questions in Cryptography is the design of round-efficient protocols that are secure under concurrent man-in-the- middle attacks. In this paper we present the first constant-round concurrent non-malleable zero-knowledge argument system for NP in the Bare Public-Key model [Canetti et al., STOC 2000], resolving one of the major open problems in this area. To achieve our result, we introduce and study the notion of non-malleable witness indistinguishability, which is of independent interest. Previous results either achieved relaxed forms of concurrency/security or needed stronger setup assumptions or required a non-constant round complexity

    Concurrent Non-Malleable Commitments (and More) in 3 Rounds

    Get PDF
    The round complexity of commitment schemes secure against man-in-the-middle attacks has been the focus of extensive research for about 25 years. The recent breakthrough of Goyal et al. [22] showed that 3 rounds are sufficient for (one-left, one-right) non-malleable commitments. This result matches a lower bound of [41]. The state of affairs leaves still open the intriguing problem of constructing 3-round concurrent non-malleable commitment schemes. In this paper we solve the above open problem by showing how to transform any 3-round (one-left one-right) non-malleable commitment scheme (with some extractability property) in a 3-round concurrent nonmalleable commitment scheme. Our transform makes use of complexity leveraging and when instantiated with the construction of [22] gives a 3-round concurrent non-malleable commitment scheme from one-way permutations secure w.r.t. subexponential-time adversaries. We also show a 3-round arguments of knowledge and a 3-round identification scheme secure against concurrent man-in-the-middle attacks

    Resettable Zero Knowledge in the Bare Public-Key Model under Standard Assumption

    Full text link
    In this paper we resolve an open problem regarding resettable zero knowledge in the bare public-key (BPK for short) model: Does there exist constant round resettable zero knowledge argument with concurrent soundness for NP\mathcal{NP} in BPK model without assuming \emph{sub-exponential hardness}? We give a positive answer to this question by presenting such a protocol for any language in NP\mathcal{NP} in the bare public-key model assuming only collision-resistant hash functions against \emph{polynomial-time} adversaries.Comment: 19 pag

    Four-Round Concurrent Non-Malleable Commitments from One-Way Functions

    Get PDF
    How many rounds and which assumptions are required for concurrent non-malleable commitments? The above question has puzzled researchers for several years. Pass in [TCC 2013] showed a lower bound of 3 rounds for the case of black-box reductions to falsifiable hardness assumptions with respect to polynomial-time adversaries. On the other side, Goyal [STOC 2011], Lin and Pass [STOC 2011] and Goyal et al. [FOCS 2012] showed that one-way functions (OWFs) are sufficient with a constant number of rounds. More recently Ciampi et al. [CRYPTO 2016] showed a 3-round construction based on subexponentially strong one-way permutations. In this work we show as main result the first 4-round concurrent non-malleable commitment scheme assuming the existence of any one-way function. Our approach builds on a new security notion for argument systems against man-in-the-middle attacks: Simulation-Witness-Independence. We show how to construct a 4-round one-many simulation-witnesses-independent argument system from one-way functions. We then combine this new tool in parallel with a weak form of non-malleable commitments constructed by Goyal et al. in [FOCS 2014] obtaining the main result of our work

    Delayed-Input Non-Malleable Zero Knowledge and Multi-Party Coin Tossing in Four Rounds

    Get PDF
    In this work we start from the following two results in the state-of-the art: 1.4-round non-malleable zero knowledge (NMZK): Goyal et al. in FOCS 2014 showed the first 4-round one-one NMZK argument from one-way functions (OWFs). Their construction requires the prover to know the instance and the witness already at the 2nd round.2.4-round multi-party coin tossing (MPCT): Garg et al. in Eurocrypt 2016 showed the first 4-round protocol for MPCT. Their result crucially relies on 3-round 3-robust parallel non-malleable commitments. So far there is no candidate construction for such a commitment scheme under standard polynomial-time hardness assumptions. We improve the state-of-the art on NMZK and MPCT by presenting the following two results: 1.a delayed-input 4-round one-many NMZK argument IINMZKfrom OWFs; moreover IINMZKis also a delayed-input many-many synchronous NMZK argument.2.a 4-round MPCT protocol IIMPCTfrom one-to-one OWFs; IIMPCTuses IINMZKas subprotocol and exploits the special properties (e.g., delayed input, many-many synchronous) of IINMZK. Both IINMZKand IIMPCTmake use of a special proof of knowledge that offers additional security guarantees when played in parallel with other protocols. The new technique behind such a proof of knowledge is an additional contribution of this work and is of independent interest
    • …
    corecore