On Adaptive Security of Delayed-Input Sigma Protocols and Fiat-Shamir NIZKs

We study adaptive security of delayed-input Sigma protocols and non-interactive zero-knowledge (NIZK) proof systems in the common reference string (CRS) model. Our contributions are threefold: - We exhibit a generic compiler taking any delayed-input Sigma protocol and returning a delayed-input Sigma protocol satisfying adaptive-input special honest-verifier zero-knowledge (SHVZK). In case the initial Sigma protocol also satisfies adaptive-input special soundness, our compiler preserves this property. - We revisit the recent paradigm by Canetti et al. (STOC 2019) for obtaining NIZK proof systems in the CRS model via the Fiat-Shamir transform applied to so-called trapdoor Sigma protocols, in the context of adaptive security. In particular, assuming correlation-intractable hash functions for all sparse relations, we prove that Fiat- Shamir NIZKs satisfy either: (i) Adaptive soundness (and non-adaptive zero-knowledge), so long as the challenge is obtained by hashing both the prover’s first round and the instance being proven; (ii) Adaptive zero-knowledge (and non-adaptive soundness), so long as the challenge is obtained by hashing only the prover’s first round, and further assuming that the initial trapdoor Sigma protocol satisfies adaptive-input SHVZK. - We exhibit a generic compiler taking any Sigma protocol and returning a trapdoor Sigma protocol. Unfortunately, this transform does not preserve the delayed-input property of the initial Sigma protocol (if any). To complement this result, we also give yet another compiler taking any delayed-input trapdoor Sigma protocol and returning a delayed-input trapdoor Sigma protocol with adaptive-input SHVZK. An attractive feature of our first two compilers is that they allow obtaining efficient delayed-input Sigma protocols with adaptive security, and efficient Fiat-Shamir NIZKs with adaptive soundness (and non-adaptive zero-knowledge) in the CRS model. Prior to our work, the latter was only possible using generic NP reductions

Comments and Improvements on Chameleon Hashing Without Key Exposure Based on Factoring

In this paper, we present some security flaws of the key-exposure free chameleon hash scheme based on factoring \cite{GWX07}. Besides, we propose an improved chameleon hash scheme without key exposure based on factoring which enjoys all the desired security notions of chameleon hashing

Limitations of the Meta-reduction Technique: The Case of Schnorr Signatures

We revisit the security of Fiat-Shamir signatures in the non-programmable random oracle model. The well-known proof by Pointcheval and Stern for such signature schemes (Journal of Cryptology, 2000) relies on the ability to re-program the random oracle, and it has been unknown if this property is inherent. Pailler and Vergnaud (Asiacrypt 2005) gave some first evidence of the hardness by showing via meta-reduction techniques that algebraic reductions cannot succeed in reducing key-only attacks against unforgeability to the discrete-log assumptions. We also use meta-reductions to show that the security of Schnorr signatures cannot be proven equivalent to the discrete logarithm problem without programming the random oracle. Our result also holds under the one-more discrete logarithm assumption but applies to a large class of reductions, we call *single-instance* reductions, subsuming those used in previous proofs of security in the (programmable) random oracle model. In contrast to algebraic reductions, our class allows arbitrary operations, but can only invoke a single resettable adversary instance, making our class incomparable to algebraic reductions. Our main result, however, is about meta-reductions and the question if this technique can be used to further strengthen the separations above. Our answer is negative. We present, to the best of our knowledge for the first time, limitations of the meta-reduction technique in the sense that finding a meta-reduction for general reductions is most likely infeasible. In fact, we prove that finding a meta-reduction against a potential reduction is equivalent to finding a ``meta-meta-reduction\u27\u27 against the strong existential unforgeability of the signature scheme. This means that the existence of a meta-reduction implies that the scheme must be insecure (against a slightly stronger attack) in the first place

Bounded Tamper Resilience: How to go beyond the Algebraic Barrier

Related key attacks (RKAs) are powerful cryptanalytic attacks where an adversary can change the secret key and observe the effect of such changes at the output. The state of the art in RKA security protects against an a-priori unbounded number of certain algebraic induced key relations, e.g., affine functions or polynomials of bounded degree. In this work, we show that it is possible to go beyond the algebraic barrier and achieve security against arbitrary key relations, by restricting the number of tampering queries the adversary is allowed to ask for. The latter restriction is necessary in case of arbitrary key relations, as otherwise a generic attack of Gennaro et al. (TCC 2004) shows how to recover the key of almost any cryptographic primitive. We describe our contributions in more detail below. 1) We show that standard ID and signature schemes constructed from a large class of $\Sigma$-protocols (including the Okamoto scheme, for instance) are secure even if the adversary can arbitrarily tamper with the prover’s state a bounded number of times and obtain some bounded amount of leakage. Interestingly, for the Okamoto scheme we can allow also independent tampering with the public parameters. 2) We show a bounded tamper and leakage resilient CCA secure public key cryptosystem based on the DDH assumption. We first define a weaker CPA-like security notion that we can instantiate based on DDH, and then we give a general compiler that yields CCA-security with tamper and leakage resilience. This requires a public tamper-proof common reference string. 3) Finally, we explain how to boost bounded tampering and leakage resilience (as in 1. and 2. above) to continuous tampering and leakage resilience, in the so-called floppy model where each user has a personal hardware token (containing leak- and tamper-free information) which can be used to refresh the secret key. We believe that bounded tampering is a meaningful and interesting alternative to avoid known impossibility results and can provide important insights into the security of existing standard cryptographic schemes

Trapdoor commitment schemes and their applications

Informally, commitment schemes can be described by lockable steely boxes. In the commitment phase, the sender puts a message into the box, locks the box and hands it over to the receiver. On one hand, the receiver does not learn anything about the message. On the other hand, the sender cannot change the message in the box anymore. In the decommitment phase the sender gives the receiver the key, and the receiver then opens the box and retrieves the message. One application of such schemes are digital auctions where each participant places his secret bid into a box and submits it to the auctioneer. In this thesis we investigate trapdoor commitment schemes. Following the abstract viewpoint of lockable boxes, a trapdoor commitment is a box with a tiny secret door. If someone knows the secret door, then this person is still able to change the committed message in the box, even after the commitment phase. Such trapdoors turn out to be very useful for the design of secure cryptographic protocols involving commitment schemes. In the first part of the thesis, we formally introduce trapdoor commitments and extend the notion to identity-based trapdoors, where trapdoors can only be used in connection with certain identities. We then recall the most popular constructions of ordinary trapdoor protocols and present new solutions for identity-based trapdoors. In the second part of the thesis, we show the usefulness of trapdoors in commitment schemes. Deploying trapdoors we construct efficient non-malleable commitment schemes which basically guarantee indepency of commitments. Furthermore, applying (identity-based) trapdoor commitments we secure well-known identification protocols against a new kind of attack. And finally, by means of trapdoors, we show how to construct composable commitment schemes that can be securely executed as subprotocols within complex protocols

Security Proofs for Identity-Based Identification and Signature Schemes

This paper provides either security proofs or attacks for a large number of identity-based identification and signature schemes defined either explicitly or implicitly in existing literature. Underlying these is a framework that on the one hand helps explain how these schemes are derived, and on the other hand enables modular security analyses, thereby helping to understand, simplify and unify previous work. We also analyze a generic folklore construction that in particular yields identity-based identification and signature schemes without random oracles

Identity based cryptography from pairings.

Yuen Tsz Hon.Thesis (M.Phil.)--Chinese University of Hong Kong, 2006.Includes bibliographical references (leaves 109-122).Abstracts in English and Chinese.Abstract --- p.iAcknowledgement --- p.iiiList of Notations --- p.viiiChapter 1 --- Introduction --- p.1Chapter 1.1 --- Identity Based Cryptography --- p.3Chapter 1.2 --- Hierarchical Identity Based Cryptosystem --- p.4Chapter 1.3 --- Our contributions --- p.5Chapter 1.4 --- Publications --- p.5Chapter 1.4.1 --- Publications Produced from This Thesis --- p.5Chapter 1.4.2 --- Publications During Author's Study in the Degree --- p.6Chapter 1.5 --- Thesis Organization --- p.6Chapter 2 --- Background --- p.8Chapter 2.1 --- Complexity Theory --- p.8Chapter 2.1.1 --- Order Notation --- p.8Chapter 2.1.2 --- Algorithms and Protocols --- p.9Chapter 2.1.3 --- Relations and Languages --- p.11Chapter 2.2 --- Algebra and Number Theory --- p.12Chapter 2.2.1 --- Groups --- p.12Chapter 2.2.2 --- Elliptic Curve --- p.13Chapter 2.2.3 --- Pairings --- p.14Chapter 2.3 --- Intractability Assumptions --- p.15Chapter 2.4 --- Cryptographic Primitives --- p.18Chapter 2.4.1 --- Public Key Encryption --- p.18Chapter 2.4.2 --- Digital Signature --- p.19Chapter 2.4.3 --- Zero Knowledge --- p.21Chapter 2.5 --- Hash Functions --- p.23Chapter 2.6 --- Random Oracle Model --- p.24Chapter 3 --- Literature Review --- p.26Chapter 3.1 --- Identity Based Signatures --- p.26Chapter 3.2 --- Identity Based Encryption --- p.27Chapter 3.3 --- Identity Based Signcryption --- p.27Chapter 3.4 --- Identity Based Blind Signatures --- p.28Chapter 3.5 --- Identity Based Group Signatures --- p.28Chapter 3.6 --- Hierarchical Identity Based Cryptography --- p.29Chapter 4 --- Blind Identity Based Signcryption --- p.30Chapter 4.1 --- Schnorr's ROS problem --- p.31Chapter 4.2 --- BIBSC and Enhanced IBSC Security Model --- p.32Chapter 4.2.1 --- Enhanced IBSC Security Model --- p.33Chapter 4.2.2 --- BIBSC Security Model --- p.36Chapter 4.3 --- Efficient and Secure BIBSC and IBSC Schemes --- p.38Chapter 4.3.1 --- Efficient and Secure IBSC Scheme --- p.38Chapter 4.3.2 --- The First BIBSC Scheme --- p.43Chapter 4.4 --- Generic Group and Pairing Model --- p.47Chapter 4.5 --- Comparisons --- p.52Chapter 4.5.1 --- Comment for IND-B --- p.52Chapter 4.5.2 --- Comment for IND-C --- p.54Chapter 4.5.3 --- Comment for EU --- p.55Chapter 4.6 --- Additional Functionality of Our Scheme --- p.56Chapter 4.6.1 --- TA Compatibility --- p.56Chapter 4.6.2 --- Forward Secrecy --- p.57Chapter 4.7 --- Chapter Conclusion --- p.57Chapter 5 --- Identity Based Group Signatures --- p.59Chapter 5.1 --- New Intractability Assumption --- p.61Chapter 5.2 --- Security Model --- p.62Chapter 5.2.1 --- Syntax --- p.63Chapter 5.2.2 --- Security Notions --- p.64Chapter 5.3 --- Constructions --- p.68Chapter 5.3.1 --- Generic Construction --- p.68Chapter 5.3.2 --- An Instantiation: IBGS-SDH --- p.69Chapter 5.4 --- Security Theorems --- p.73Chapter 5.5 --- Discussions --- p.81Chapter 5.5.1 --- Other Instantiations --- p.81Chapter 5.5.2 --- Short Ring Signatures --- p.82Chapter 5.6 --- Chapter Conclusion --- p.82Chapter 6 --- Hierarchical IBS without Random Oracles --- p.83Chapter 6.1 --- New Intractability Assumption --- p.87Chapter 6.2 --- Security Model: HIBS and HIBSC --- p.89Chapter 6.2.1 --- HIBS Security Model --- p.89Chapter 6.2.2 --- Hierarchical Identity Based Signcryption (HIBSC) --- p.92Chapter 6.3 --- Efficient Instantiation of HIBS --- p.95Chapter 6.3.1 --- Security Analysis --- p.96Chapter 6.3.2 --- Ordinary Signature from HIBS --- p.101Chapter 6.4 --- Plausibility Arguments for the Intractability of the OrcYW Assumption --- p.102Chapter 6.5 --- Efficient HIBSC without Random Oracles --- p.103Chapter 6.5.1 --- Generic Composition from HIBE and HIBS --- p.104Chapter 6.5.2 --- Concrete Instantiation --- p.105Chapter 6.6 --- Chapter Conclusion --- p.107Chapter 7 --- Conclusion --- p.108Bibliography --- p.10

On Black-Box Complexity and Adaptive, Universal Composability of Cryptographic Tasks

Two main goals of modern cryptography are to identify the minimal assumptions necessary to construct secure cryptographic primitives as well as to construct secure protocols in strong and realistic adversarial models. In this thesis, we address both of these fundamental questions. In the first part of this thesis, we present results on the black-box complexity of two basic cryptographic primitives: non-malleable encryption and optimally-fair coin tossing. Black-box reductions are reductions in which both the underlying primitive as well as the adversary are accessed only in an input-output (or black-box) manner. Most known cryptographic reductions are black-box. Moreover, black-box reductions are typically more efficient than non-black-box reductions. Thus, the black-box complexity of cryptographic primitives is a meaningful and important area of study which allows us to gain insight into the primitive. We study the black box complexity of non-malleable encryption and optimally-fair coin tossing, showing a positive result for the former and a negative one for the latter. Non-malleable encryption is a strong security notion for public-key encryption, guaranteeing that it is impossible to "maul" a ciphertext of a message m into a ciphertext of a related message. This security guarantee is essential for many applications such as auctions. We show how to transform, in a black-box manner, any public-key encryption scheme satisfying a weak form of security, semantic security, to a scheme satisfying non-malleability. Coin tossing is perhaps the most basic cryptographic primitive, allowing two distrustful parties to flip a coin whose outcome is 0 or 1 with probability 1/2. A fair coin tossing protocol is one in which the outputted bit is unbiased, even in the case where one of the parties may abort early. However, in the setting where parties may abort early, there is always a strategy for one of the parties to impose bias of Omega(1/r) in an r-round protocol. Thus, achieving bias of O(1/r) in r rounds is optimal, and it was recently shown that optimally-fair coin tossing can be achieved via a black-box reduction to oblivious transfer. We show that it cannot be achieved via a black-box reduction to one-way function, unless the number of rounds is at least Omega(n/log n), where n is the input/output length of the one-way function. In the second part of this thesis, we present protocols for multiparty computation (MPC) in the Universal Composability (UC) model that are secure against malicious, adaptive adversaries. In the standard model, security is only guaranteed in a stand-alone setting; however, nothing is guaranteed when multiple protocols are arbitrarily composed. In contrast, the UC model, introduced by (Canetti, 2000), considers the execution of an unbounded number of concurrent protocols, in an arbitrary, and adversarially controlled network environment. Another drawback of the standard model is that the adversary must decide which parties to corrupt before the execution of the protocol commences. A more realistic model allows the adversary to adaptively choose which parties to corrupt based on its evolving view during the protocol. In our work we consider the the adaptive UC model, which combines these two security requirements by allowing both arbitrary composition of protocols and adaptive corruption of parties. In our first result, we introduce an improved, efficient construction of non-committing encryption (NCE) with optimal round complexity, from a weaker primitive we introduce called trapdoor-simulatable public key encryption (PKE). NCE is a basic primitive necessary to construct protocols secure under adaptive corruptions and in particular, is used to construct oblivious transfer (OT) protocols secure against semi-honest, adaptive adversaries. Additionally, we show how to realize trapdoor-simulatable PKE from hardness of factoring Blum integers, thus achieving the first construction of NCE from hardness of factoring. In our second result, we present a compiler for transforming an OT protocol secure against a semi-honest, adaptive adversary into one that is secure against a malicious, adaptive adversary. Our compiler achieves security in the UC model, assuming access to an ideal commitment functionality, and improves over previous work achieving the same security guarantee in two ways: it uses black-box access to the underlying protocol and achieves a constant multiplicative overhead in the round complexity. Combining our two results with the work of (Ishai et al., 2008), we obtain the first black-box construction of UC and adaptively secure MPC from trapdoor-simulatable PKE and the ideal commitment functionality

The representation problem based on factoring

We review the representation problem based on factoring and show that this problem gives rise to alternative solutions to a lot of cryptographic protocols in the literature. And, while the solutions so far usually either rely on the RSA problem or the intractability of factoring integers of a special form (e.g., Blum integers), the solutions here work with the most general factoring assumption. Protocols we discuss include identification schemes secure against parallel attacks, secure signatures, blind signatures and (non-malleable) commitments