Key recycling in authentication

In their seminal work on authentication, Wegman and Carter propose that to authenticate multiple messages, it is sufficient to reuse the same hash function as long as each tag is encrypted with a one-time pad. They argue that because the one-time pad is perfectly hiding, the hash function used remains completely unknown to the adversary. Since their proof is not composable, we revisit it using a composable security framework. It turns out that the above argument is insufficient: if the adversary learns whether a corrupted message was accepted or rejected, information about the hash function is leaked, and after a bounded finite amount of rounds it is completely known. We show however that this leak is very small: Wegman and Carter's protocol is still $\epsilon$-secure, if $\epsilon$-almost strongly universal$_2$ hash functions are used. This implies that the secret key corresponding to the choice of hash function can be reused in the next round of authentication without any additional error than this $\epsilon$. We also show that if the players have a mild form of synchronization, namely that the receiver knows when a message should be received, the key can be recycled for any arbitrary task, not only new rounds of authentication.Comment: 17+3 pages. 11 figures. v3: Rewritten with AC instead of UC. Extended the main result to both synchronous and asynchronous networks. Matches published version up to layout and updated references. v2: updated introduction and reference

A New Algorithm for Solving Ring-LPN with a Reducible Polynomial

The LPN (Learning Parity with Noise) problem has recently proved to be of great importance in cryptology. A special and very useful case is the RING-LPN problem, which typically provides improved efficiency in the constructed cryptographic primitive. We present a new algorithm for solving the RING-LPN problem in the case when the polynomial used is reducible. It greatly outperforms previous algorithms for solving this problem. Using the algorithm, we can break the Lapin authentication protocol for the proposed instance using a reducible polynomial, in about 2^70 bit operations

On the efficiency of revocation in RSA-based anonymous systems

© 2016 IEEEThe problem of revocation in anonymous authentication systems is subtle and has motivated a lot of work. One of the preferable solutions consists in maintaining either a whitelist L-W of non-revoked users or a blacklist L-B of revoked users, and then requiring users to additionally prove, when authenticating themselves, that they are in L-W (membership proof) or that they are not in L-B (non-membership proof). Of course, these additional proofs must not break the anonymity properties of the system, so they must be zero-knowledge proofs, revealing nothing about the identity of the users. In this paper, we focus on the RSA-based setting, and we consider the case of non-membership proofs to blacklists L = L-B. The existing solutions for this setting rely on the use of universal dynamic accumulators; the underlying zero-knowledge proofs are bit complicated, and thus their efficiency; although being independent from the size of the blacklist L, seems to be improvable. Peng and Bao already tried to propose simpler and more efficient zero-knowledge proofs for this setting, but we prove in this paper that their protocol is not secure. We fix the problem by designing a new protocol, and formally proving its security properties. We then compare the efficiency of the new zero-knowledge non-membership protocol with that of the protocol, when they are integrated with anonymous authentication systems based on RSA (notably, the IBM product Idemix for anonymous credentials). We discuss for which values of the size k of the blacklist L, one protocol is preferable to the other one, and we propose different ways to combine and implement the two protocols.Postprint (author's final draft

Quantum Cryptography Beyond Quantum Key Distribution

Quantum cryptography is the art and science of exploiting quantum mechanical effects in order to perform cryptographic tasks. While the most well-known example of this discipline is quantum key distribution (QKD), there exist many other applications such as quantum money, randomness generation, secure two- and multi-party computation and delegated quantum computation. Quantum cryptography also studies the limitations and challenges resulting from quantum adversaries---including the impossibility of quantum bit commitment, the difficulty of quantum rewinding and the definition of quantum security models for classical primitives. In this review article, aimed primarily at cryptographers unfamiliar with the quantum world, we survey the area of theoretical quantum cryptography, with an emphasis on the constructions and limitations beyond the realm of QKD.Comment: 45 pages, over 245 reference