Multi-property-preserving Domain Extension Using Polynomial-Based Modes of Operation

  • Jooyoung Lee
  • John Steinberger
Part of the Lecture Notes in Computer Science book series (LNCS, volume 6110)

Abstract

In this paper, we propose a new double-piped mode of operation for multi-property-preserving domain extension of MACs (message authentication codes), PRFs (pseudorandom functions) and PROs (pseudorandom oracles). Our mode of operation performs twice as fast as the original double-piped mode of operation of Lucks [15] while providing comparable security. Our construction, which uses a class of polynomial-based compression functions proposed by Stam [22,23], makes a single call to a 3n-bit to n-bit primitive at each iteration and uses a finalization function f2 at the last iteration, producing an n-bit hash function H[f1,f2] satisfying the following properties.

  1. 1

    H[f1,f2] is unforgeable up to O(2n/n) query complexity as long as f1 and f2 are unforgeable.

     
  2. 1

    H[f1,f2] is pseudorandom up to O(2n/n) query complexity as long as f1 is unforgeable and f2 is pseudorandom.

     
  3. 1

    H[f1,f2] is indifferentiable from a random oracle up to O(22n/3) query complexity as long as f1 and f2 are public random functions.

     

To our knowledge, our result constitutes the first time O(2n/n) unforgeability has been achieved using only an unforgeable primitive of n-bit output length. (Yasuda showed unforgeability of O(25n/6) for Lucks’ construction assuming an unforgeable primitive, but the analysis is sub-optimal; in the appendix, we show how Yasuda’s bound can be improved to O(2n).)

In related work, we strengthen Stam’s collision resistance analysis of polynomial-based compression functions (showing that unforgeability of the primitive suffices) and discuss how to implement our mode by replacing f1 with a 2n-bit key blockcipher in Davies-Meyer mode or by replacing f1 with the cascade of two 2n-bit to n-bit compression functions.

References

  1. 1.
    An, J.H., Bellare, M.: Constructing VIL-MACs from FIL-MACs: Message authentication under weakened assumptions. In: Wiener, M. (ed.) CRYPTO 1999. LNCS, vol. 1666, pp. 252–269. Springer, Heidelberg (1999)Google Scholar
  2. 2.
    Bellare, M., Ristenpart, T.: Multi-property-preserving Hash Domain Extension and the EMD Transform. In: Lai, X., Chen, K. (eds.) ASIACRYPT 2006. LNCS, vol. 4284, pp. 299–314. Springer, Heidelberg (2006)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Coron, J., Dodis, Y., Malinaud, C., Puniya, P.: Merkle-Damgård revisited: How to construct a hash function. In: Shoup, V. (ed.) CRYPTO 2005. LNCS, vol. 3621, pp. 430–448. Springer, Heidelberg (2005)Google Scholar
  4. 4.
    Damgård, I.: A design principle for hash functions. In: Brassard, G. (ed.) CRYPTO 1989. LNCS, vol. 435, pp. 416–427. Springer, Heidelberg (1990)Google Scholar
  5. 5.
    Dodis, Y., Pietrzak, K., Puniya, P.: A new mode of operation for block ciphers and length-preserving MACs. In: Smart, N.P. (ed.) EUROCRYPT 2008. LNCS, vol. 4965, pp. 198–219. Springer, Heidelberg (2008)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Dodis, Y., Ristenpart, T., Shrimpton, T.: Salvaging Merkle-Damgård for practical applications. In: Joux, A. (ed.) EUROCRYPT 2009. LNCS, vol. 5479, pp. 371–388. Springer, Heidelberg (2009)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Dodis, Y., Steinberger, J.: Message authentication codes from unpredictable block ciphers. In: Halevi, S. (ed.) CRYPTO 2009. LNCS, vol. 5677, pp. 267–285. Springer, Heidelberg (2009)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    von zur Gathen, J., Panario, D.: Factoring polynomials over finite fields: A survey. J. Symbolic computation 31, 3–17 (2001)MATHCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    von zur Gathen, J., Shoup, V.: Computing Frobenius maps and factoring polynomials. Computational complexity 2, 187–224 (1992)MATHCrossRefMathSciNetGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Hirose, S.: Some plausible constructions of double length hash functions. In: Robshaw, M.J.B. (ed.) FSE 2006. LNCS, vol. 4047, pp. 210–225. Springer, Heidelberg (2006)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Joux, A.: Multicollisions in iterated hash functions. Application to cascaded constructions. In: Franklin, M. (ed.) CRYPTO 2004. LNCS, vol. 3152, pp. 306–316. Springer, Heidelberg (2004)Google Scholar
  12. 12.
    Kelsey, J., Kohno, T.: Herding hash functions and the Nostradmus attack. In: Vaudenay, S. (ed.) EUROCRYPT 2006. LNCS, vol. 4004, pp. 183–200. Springer, Heidelberg (2006)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Kelsey, J., Schneier, B.: Second preimages on n-bit hash functions for much less than 2n work. In: Cramer, R. (ed.) EUROCRYPT 2005. LNCS, vol. 3494, pp. 474–490. Springer, Heidelberg (2005)Google Scholar
  14. 14.
    Lai, X., Massey, J.: Hash function based on block ciphers. In: Rueppel, R.A. (ed.) EUROCRYPT 1992. LNCS, vol. 658, pp. 55–70. Springer, Heidelberg (1993)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Lucks, S.: A failure-freindly design principle for hash functions. In: Roy, B. (ed.) ASIACRYPT 2005. LNCS, vol. 3788, pp. 474–494. Springer, Heidelberg (2005)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Lucks, S.: A collision-resistant rate-1 double-block-length hash function. In: Symmetric Cryptography, Dagstuhl Seminar Proceedings 07021 (2007)Google Scholar
  17. 17.
    Merkle, R.: One way hash functions and DES. In: Brassard, G. (ed.) CRYPTO 1989. LNCS, vol. 435, pp. 428–446. Springer, Heidelberg (1990)Google Scholar
  18. 18.
    Maurer, U., Renner, R., Holenstein, R.: Indifferentiability, impossibility results on reductions, and apllications to the random oracle methodology. In: Naor, M. (ed.) TCC 2004. LNCS, vol. 2951, pp. 21–39. Springer, Heidelberg (2004)Google Scholar
  19. 19.
    Maurer, U., Sjödin, J.: Single-key AIL-MACs from any FIL-MAC. In: Caires, L., Italiano, G.F., Monteiro, L., Palamidessi, C., Yung, M. (eds.) ICALP 2005. LNCS, vol. 3580, pp. 472–484. Springer, Heidelberg (2005)Google Scholar
  20. 20.
    Özen, O., Stam, M.: Another glance at double length hashing. In: Parker, M.G. (ed.) Cryptography and Coding 2009. LNCS, vol. 5921, pp. 176–201. Springer, Heidelberg (2009)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. 21.
    Rogaway, P., Steinberger, J.: Constructing cryptographic hash functions from fixed-key blockciphers. In: Wagner, D. (ed.) CRYPTO 2008. LNCS, vol. 5157, pp. 433–450. Springer, Heidelberg (2008)Google Scholar
  22. 22.
    Stam, M.: Beyond uniformity: Security/efficiency tradeoffs for compression functions. In: Wagner, D. (ed.) CRYPTO 2008. LNCS, vol. 5157, pp. 397–412. Springer, Heidelberg (2008)Google Scholar
  23. 23.
    Stam, M.: Blockcipher based hashing revisited. In: Dunkelman, O. (ed.) FSE 2009. LNCS, vol. 5665, pp. 67–83. Springer, Heidelberg (2009)Google Scholar
  24. 24.
    Yasuda, K.: A double-piped mode of operation for MACs, PRFs and PROs: Security beyond the birthday barrier. In: Joux, A. (ed.) EUROCRYPT 2009. LNCS, vol. 5479, pp. 242–259. Springer, Heidelberg (2009)CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg 2010

Authors and Affiliations

  • Jooyoung Lee
    • 1
  • John Steinberger
    • 2
  1. 1.The Attached Institute of Electronics and Telecommunications Research InstituteDaejeonKorea
  2. 2.Institute of Theoretical Computer ScienceTsinghua UniversityBeijingChina

Personalised recommendations