Efficiency Bounds for Adversary Constructions in Black-Box Reductions

  • Ahto Buldas
  • Aivo Jürgenson
  • Margus Niitsoo
Part of the Lecture Notes in Computer Science book series (LNCS, volume 5594)

Abstract

We establish a framework for bounding the efficiency of cryptographic reductions in terms of their security transfer. While efficiency bounds for the reductions have been studied for about ten years, the main focus has been the efficiency of the construction mostly measured by the number of calls to the basic primitive by the constructed primitive. Our work focuses on the efficiency of the wrapper construction that builds an adversary for the basic primitive and has black-box access to an adversary for the constructed primitive. We present and prove a general upper bound theorem for the efficiency of black-box reductions. We also provide an example about upper bound for reductions between two security notions of cryptographic hash functions, which gives a negative answer to the open question about the existence of linear-preserving reductions from the so-called hash-then-publish time-stamping schemes to the collision resistance of the underlying hash function.

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. 1.
    Baker, T., Gill, J., Solovay, R.: Relativizations of the \(\rm \mathcal{P}\) =?\(\rm \mathcal{NP}\) question. SIAM Journal on Computing 4, 431–442 (1975)MathSciNetCrossRefMATHGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Buldas, A., Saarepera, M.: On Provably Secure Time-Stamping Schemes. In: Lee, P.J. (ed.) ASIACRYPT 2004. LNCS, vol. 3329, pp. 500–514. Springer, Heidelberg (2004)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Gennaro, R., Gertner, Y., Katz, J.: Lower bounds on the efficiency of encryption and digital signature schemes. In: Proceedings of the thirty-fifth annual ACM symposium on Theory of computing, pp. 417–425 (2003)Google Scholar
  4. 4.
    Gennaro, R., Gertner, Y., Katz, J., Trevisan, L.: Bounds on the efficiency of generic cryptographic constructions. SIAM Journal on Computing 35, 217–246 (2006)MathSciNetCrossRefMATHGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Gertner, Y., Kannan, S., Malkin, T., Reingold, O., Viswanathan, M.: The relationship between public key encryption and oblivious transfer. In: 41st Annual Symposium on Foundations of Computer Science, Redondo Beach, California, November 2000, pp. 325–335 (2000)Google Scholar
  6. 6.
    Gennaro, R., Trevisan, L.: Lower Bounds on the Efficiency of Generic Cryptographic Constructions. In: FOCS 2000, pp. 305–313 (2000)Google Scholar
  7. 7.
    Impagliazzo, R., Rudich, S.: Limits on the provable consequences of one-way permutations. In: Proc. of the Twenty First Annual ACM Symposium on Theory of Computing, pp. 44–61 (1989)Google Scholar
  8. 8.
    Kim, J.H., Simon, D.R., Tetali, P.: Limits on the efficiency of one-way permutation-based hash functions. In: Proceedings of the 40th Annual Symposium on Foundations of Computer Science, pp. 535–542 (1999)Google Scholar
  9. 9.
    Luby, M.: Pseudorandomness and cryptographic applications. Princeton University Press, Princeton (1996)MATHGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Reingold, O., Trevisan, L., Vadhan, S.: Notions of reducibility between cryptographic primitives. In: Naor, M. (ed.) TCC 2004. LNCS, vol. 2951, pp. 1–20. Springer, Heidelberg (2004)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Rogaway, P., Shrimpton, T.: Cryptographic Hash-Function Basics: Definitions, Implications, and Separations for Preimage Resistance, Second-Preimage Resistance, and Collision Resistance. In: Roy, B., Meier, W. (eds.) FSE 2004. LNCS, vol. 3017, pp. 371–388. Springer, Heidelberg (2004)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Stevens, M., Lenstra, A., de Weger, B.: Chosen-prefix collisions for md5 and colliding x.509 certificates for different identities. In: Naor, M. (ed.) EUROCRYPT 2007. LNCS, vol. 4515, pp. 1–22. Springer, Heidelberg (2007)CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg 2009

Authors and Affiliations

  • Ahto Buldas
    • 1
    • 2
    • 3
  • Aivo Jürgenson
    • 2
    • 4
  • Margus Niitsoo
    • 1
    • 3
  1. 1.Cybernetica ASTallinnEstonia
  2. 2.Tallinn University of TechnologyTallinnEstonia
  3. 3.University of TartuTartuEstonia
  4. 4.Elion Enterprises LtdTallinnEstonia

Personalised recommendations