2,618 research outputs found

    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

    Continuously non-malleable codes with split-state refresh

    Get PDF
    Non-malleable codes for the split-state model allow to encode a message into two parts, such that arbitrary independent tampering on each part, and subsequent decoding of the corresponding modified codeword, yields either the same as the original message, or a completely unrelated value. Continuously non-malleable codes further allow to tolerate an unbounded (polynomial) number of tampering attempts, until a decoding error happens. The drawback is that, after an error happens, the system must self-destruct and stop working, otherwise generic attacks become possible. In this paper we propose a solution to this limitation, by leveraging a split-state refreshing procedure. Namely, whenever a decoding error happens, the two parts of an encoding can be locally refreshed (i.e., without any interaction), which allows to avoid the self-destruct mechanism. An additional feature of our security model is that it captures directly security against continual leakage attacks. We give an abstract framework for building such codes in the common reference string model, and provide a concrete instantiation based on the external Diffie-Hellman assumption. Finally, we explore applications in which our notion turns out to be essential. The first application is a signature scheme tolerating an arbitrary polynomial number of split-state tampering attempts, without requiring a self-destruct capability, and in a model where refreshing of the memory happens only after an invalid output is produced. This circumvents an impossibility result from a recent work by Fuijisaki and Xagawa (Asiacrypt 2016). The second application is a compiler for tamper-resilient RAM programs. In comparison to other tamper-resilient compilers, ours has several advantages, among which the fact that, for the first time, it does not rely on the self-destruct feature

    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

    Efficient non-malleable commitment schemes

    Get PDF
    We present efficient non-malleable commitment schemes based on standard assumptions such as RSA and Discrete-Log, and under the condition that the network provides publicly available RSA or Discrete-Log parameters generated by a trusted party. Our protocols require only three rounds and a few modular exponentiations. We also discuss the difference between the notion of non-malleable commitment schemes used by Dolev, Dwork and Naor [DDN00] and the one given by Di Crescenzo, Ishai and Ostrovsky [DIO98]

    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

    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

    A New Approach to Post-Quantum Non-Malleability

    Full text link
    We provide the first constant\mathit{constant}-round\mathit{round} construction of post-quantum non-malleable commitments under the minimal assumption that post\mathit{post}-quantum\mathit{quantum} one\mathit{one}-way\mathit{way} functions\mathit{functions} exist. We achieve the standard notion of non-malleability with respect to commitments. Prior constructions required Ω(logλ)\Omega(\log^*\lambda) rounds under the same assumption. We achieve our results through a new technique for constant-round non-malleable commitments which is easier to use in the post-quantum setting. The technique also yields an almost elementary proof of security for constant-round non-malleable commitments in the classical setting, which may be of independent interest. When combined with existing work, our results yield the first constant-round quantum-secure multiparty computation for both classical and quantum functionalities in\mathit{in} the\mathit{the} plain\mathit{plain} model\mathit{model}, under the polynomial\mathit{polynomial} hardness of quantum fully-homomorphic encryption and quantum learning with errors
    corecore