On non-adaptive quantum chosen-ciphertext attacks and Learning with Errors

Large-scale quantum computing is a significant threat to classical public-key cryptography. In strong “quantum access” security models, numerous symmetric-key cryptosystems are also vulnerable. We consider classical encryption in a model which grants the adversary quantum oracle access to encryption and decryption, but where the latter is restricted to non-adaptive (i.e., pre-challenge) queries only. We define this model formally using appropriate notions of

On quantum chosen-ciphertext attacks and learning with errors

Quantum computing is a significant threat to classical public-key cryptography. In strong “quantum access” security models, numerous symmetric-key cryptosystems are also vulnerable. We consider classical encryption in a model which grants the adversary quantum oracle access to encryption and decryption, but where the latter is restricted to non-adaptive (i.e., pre-challenge) queries only. We define this model formally using appropriate notions of ciphertext indistinguishability and semantic security (which are equivalent by standard arguments) and call it QCCA1 in analogy to the classical CCA1 security model. Using a bound on quantum random-access codes, we show that the standard PRF-based encryption schemes are QCCA1-secure when instantiated with quantum-secure primitives. We then revisit standard IND-CPA-secure Learning with Errors (LWE) encryption and show that leaking just one quantum decryption query (and no other queries or leakage of any kind) allows the adversary to recover the full secret key with constant success probability. In the classical setting, by contrast, recovering the key requires a linear number of decryption queries. The algorithm at the core of our attack is a (large-modulus version of) the well-known Bernstein-Vazirani algorithm. We emphasize that our results should not be interpreted as a weakness of these cryptosystems in their stated security setting (i.e., post-quantum chosen-plaintext secrecy). Rather, our results mean that, if these cryptosystems are exposed to chosen-ciphertext attacks (e.g., as a result of deployment in an inappropriate real-world setting) then quantum attacks are even more devastating than classical ones

Adjuvant whole abdominal intensity modulated radiotherapy (IMRT) for high risk stage FIGO III patients with ovarian cancer (OVAR-IMRT-01) – Pilot trial of a phase I/II study: study protocol

<p>Abstract</p> <p>Background</p> <p>The prognosis for patients with advanced epithelial ovarian cancer remains poor despite aggressive surgical resection and platinum-based chemotherapy. More than 60% of patients will develop recurrent disease, principally intraperitoneal, and die within 5 years. The use of whole abdominal irradiation (WAI) as consolidation therapy would appear to be a logical strategy given its ability to sterilize small tumour volumes. Despite the clinically proven efficacy of whole abdominal irradiation, the use of radiotherapy in ovarian cancer has profoundly decreased mainly due to high treatment-related toxicity. Modern intensity-modulated radiation therapy (IMRT) could allow to spare kidneys, liver, and bone marrow while still adequately covering the peritoneal cavity with a homogenous dose.</p> <p>Methods/Design</p> <p>The OVAR-IMRT-01 study is a single center pilot trial of a phase I/II study. Patients with advanced ovarian cancer stage FIGO III (R1 or R2< 1 cm) after surgical resection and platinum-based chemotherapy will be treated with whole abdomen irradiation as consolidation therapy using intensity modulated radiation therapy (IMRT) to a total dose of 30 Gy in 1.5 Gy fractions. A total of 8 patients will be included in this trial. For treatment planning bone marrow, kidneys, liver, spinal cord, vertebral bodies and pelvic bones are defined as organs at risk. The planning target volume includes the entire peritoneal cavity plus pelvic and para-aortic node regions.</p> <p>Discussion</p> <p>The primary endpoint of the study is the evaluation of the feasibility of intensity-modulated WAI and the evaluation of the study protocol. Secondary endpoint is evaluation of the toxicity of intensity modulated WAI before continuing with the phase I/II study. The aim is to explore the potential of IMRT as a new method for WAI to decrease the dose to kidneys, liver, bone marrow while covering the peritoneal cavity with a homogenous dose, and to implement whole abdominal intensity-modulated radiotherapy into the adjuvant multimodal treatment concept of advanced ovarian cancer FIGO stage III.</p

Cognitive demands of face monitoring: Evidence for visuospatial overload

Young children perform difficult communication tasks better face to face than when they cannot see one another (e.g., Doherty-Sneddon & Kent, 1996). However, in recent studies, it was found that children aged 6 and 10 years, describing abstract shapes, showed evidence of face-to-face interference rather than facilitation. For some communication tasks, access to visual signals (such as facial expression and eye gaze) may hinder rather than help children’s communication. In new research we have pursued this interference effect. Five studies are described with adults and 10- and 6-year-old participants. It was found that looking at a face interfered with children’s abilities to listen to descriptions of abstract shapes. Children also performed visuospatial memory tasks worse when they looked at someone’s face prior to responding than when they looked at a visuospatial pattern or at the floor. It was concluded that performance on certain tasks was hindered by monitoring another person’s face. It is suggested that processing of visual communication signals shares certain processing resources with the processing of other visuospatial information

Development of gaze aversion as disengagement from visual information

Older children, but not younger children, were found to look away more from the face of an interlocutor when answering difficult as opposed to easy questions. Similar results were found in earlier work with adults, who often avert their gaze during cognitively difficult tasks (A.M. Glenberg, J.L. Schroeder, & D.A. Robertson, 1998). Twenty-five 8-year-olds and 26 5-year-olds answered verbal reasoning and arithmetic questions of varying difficulty. The older children increased gaze aversion from the face of the adult questioner in response to both difficult verbal reasoning questions and difficult arithmetic questions. In contrast, younger children (5-year-olds) responded less consistently to cognitive difficulty. It is concluded that adultlike patterns of gaze aversion in response to cognitive difficulty are certainly acquired by 8 years of age. The implications of appropriate gaze aversion for children’s management of cognitive resources are considered