Advertisement

Generic Construction of Audit Logging Schemes with Forward Privacy and Authenticity

  • Shoichi HiroseEmail author
Conference paper
Part of the Lecture Notes in Computer Science book series (LNCS, volume 9543)

Abstract

In this paper, audit logging schemes with forward privacy and authenticity are formalized in the symmetric-key setting. Then, two generic audit logging schemes with forward privacy and authenticity are proposed. One consists of an authenticated encryption scheme with associated data. The other consists of a symmetric encryption scheme and a MAC function. Both of them also uses a forward-secure pseudorandom generator to achieve forward security. Finally, the forward privacy and authenticity of the schemes are confirmed in the manner of provable security. The security properties of the proposed schemes are reduced to the standard security properties of the underlying primitives.

Keywords

Audit logging Forward security Privacy Authenticity 

Notes

Acknowledgments

The author would like to thank Hidenori Kuwakado for valuable discussions. This work was partially supported by JSPS KAKENHI Grant Number 25330150.

References

  1. 1.
    Accorsi, R.: Safe-keeping digital evidence with secure logging protocols: state of the art and challenges. In: Goebel, O., Ehlert, R., Frings, S., Günther, D., Morgenstern, H., Schadt, D. (eds.) IMF 2009, Fifth International Conference on IT Security Incident Management and IT Forensics, pp. 94–110 (2009)Google Scholar
  2. 2.
    Bellare, M., Canetti, R., Krawczyk, H.: Pseudorandom functions revisited: the cascade construction and its concrete security. In: Proceedings of the 37th IEEE Symposium on Foundations of Computer Science, pp. 514–523 (1996)Google Scholar
  3. 3.
    Bellare, M., Namprempre, C.: Authenticated encryption: relations among notions and analysis of the generic composition paradigm. In: Okamoto, T. (ed.) ASIACRYPT 2000. LNCS, vol. 1976, pp. 531–545. Springer, Heidelberg (2000)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Bellare, M., Namprempre, C.: Authenticated encryption: relations among notions and analysis of the generic composition paradigm. J. Cryptology 21(4), 469–491 (2008)MathSciNetCrossRefzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Bellare, M., Yee, B.S.: Forward integrity for secure audit logs. Technical report, University of California, San Diego (1997)Google Scholar
  6. 6.
    Bellare, M., Yee, B.S.: Forward-security in private-key cryptography. In: Joye, M. (ed.) CT-RSA 2003. LNCS, vol. 2612, pp. 1–18. Springer, Heidelberg (2003). the full version is IACR Cryptology ePrint Archive: Report 2001/035 at http://eprint.iacr.org/ CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Blum, M., Micali, S.: How to generate cryptographically strong sequences of pseudo-random bits. SIAM J. Comput. 13(4), 850–864 (1984)MathSciNetCrossRefzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    CAESAR: Competition for authenticated encryption: security, applicability, and robustness, http://competitions.cr.yp.to/caesar.html
  9. 9.
    Goldreich, O., Goldwasser, S., Micali, S.: How to construct random functions. J. ACM 33(4), 792–807 (1986)MathSciNetCrossRefzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Günther, C.G.: An identity-based key-exchange protocol. In: Quisquater, J.-J., Vandewalle, J. (eds.) EUROCRYPT 1989. LNCS, vol. 434, pp. 29–37. Springer, Heidelberg (1990)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Hirose, S., Kuwakado, H.: Forward-secure sequential aggregate message authentication revisited. In: Chow, S.S.M., Liu, J.K., Hui, L.C.K., Yiu, S.M. (eds.) ProvSec 2014. LNCS, vol. 8782, pp. 87–102. Springer, Heidelberg (2014)Google Scholar
  12. 12.
    Ma, D., Tsudik, G.: Extended abstract: forward-secure sequential aggregate authentication. In: IEEE Symposium on Security and Privacy, pp. 86–91. IEEE Computer Society (2007), also published as IACR Cryptology ePrint Archive: Report 2007/052 at http://eprint.iacr.org/
  13. 13.
    Ma, D., Tsudik, G.: A new approach to secure logging. ACM Trans. Storage 5(1), 2:1–2:21 (2009)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Namprempre, C., Rogaway, P., Shrimpton, T.: Reconsidering generic composition. In: Nguyen, P.Q., Oswald, E. (eds.) EUROCRYPT 2014. LNCS, vol. 8441, pp. 257–274. Springer, Heidelberg (2014)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Rogaway, P.: Authenticated-encryption with associated-data. In: Atluri, V. (ed.) ACM Conference on Computer and Communications Security, pp. 98–107 (2002)Google Scholar
  16. 16.
    Rogaway, P., Bellare, M., Black, J., Krovetz, T.: OCB: a block-cipher mode of operation for efficient authenticated encryption. In: ACM Conference on Computer and Communications Security, pp. 196–205 (2001)Google Scholar
  17. 17.
    Rogaway, P., Shrimpton, T.: A provable-security treatment of the key-wrap problem. In: Vaudenay, S. (ed.) EUROCRYPT 2006. LNCS, vol. 4004, pp. 373–390. Springer, Heidelberg (2006)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
    Schneier, B., Kelsey, J.: Cryptographic support for secure logs on untrusted machines. In: Rubin, A.D. (ed.) Proceedings of the 7th USENIX Security Symposium. USENIX Association (1998)Google Scholar
  19. 19.
    Schneier, B., Kelsey, J.: Secure audit logs to support computer forensics. ACM Trans. Inf. Syst. Secur. 2(2), 159–176 (1999)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. 20.
    Waters, B.R., Balfanz, D., Durfee, G., Smetters, D.K.: Building an encrypted and searchable audit log. In: Proceedings of the Network and Distributed System Security Symposium, NDSS 2004, The Internet Society (2004)Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer International Publishing Switzerland 2016

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Graduate School of EngineeringUniversity of FukuiFukuiJapan

Personalised recommendations