Advertisement

Computer-Aided Cryptographic Proofs

  • Gilles Barthe
  • Benjamin Grégoire
  • Santiago Zanella Béguelin
Conference paper
Part of the Lecture Notes in Computer Science book series (LNCS, volume 7460)

Abstract

Provable security [6] is at the heart of modern cryptography. It advocates a mathematical approach in which the security of new cryptographic constructions is defined rigorously, and provably reduced to one or several assumptions, such as the hardness of a computational problem, or the existence of an ideal functionality. A typical provable security statement is of the form: for all adversary \(\mathcal{A}\) against the cryptographic construction \(\mathcal{S}\), there exists an adversary \(\mathcal{B}\) against a security assumption \(\mathcal{H}\), such that if \(\mathcal{A}\) has a high probability of breaking the scheme \(\mathcal{S}\) in time t, then \(\mathcal{B}\) has a high probability of breaking the assumption \(\mathcal{H}\) in time t′ (defined as a function of t).

Keywords

Process Algebra Probabilistic Program Provable Security Hoare Logic Modern Cryptography 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.

References

  1. 1.
    Barthe, G., Grégoire, B., Heraud, S., Béguelin, S.Z.: Computer-Aided Security Proofs for the Working Cryptographer. In: Rogaway, P. (ed.) CRYPTO 2011. LNCS, vol. 6841, pp. 71–90. Springer, Heidelberg (2011)Google Scholar
  2. 2.
    Barthe, G., Grégoire, B., Béguelin, S.Z.: Formal certification of code-based cryptographic proofs. In: 36th ACM SIGPLAN-SIGACT Symposium on Principles of Programming Languages, POPL 2009, pp. 90–101. ACM, New York (2009)Google Scholar
  3. 3.
    Barthe, G., Köpf, B., Olmedo, F., Béguelin, S.Z.: Probabilistic reasoning for differential privacy. In: 39th ACM SIGPLAN-SIGACT Symposium on Principles of Programming Languages, POPL 2012, pp. 97–110. ACM, New York (2012)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Bellare, M., Rogaway, P.: The Security of Triple Encryption and a Framework for Code-Based Game-Playing Proofs. In: Vaudenay, S. (ed.) EUROCRYPT 2006. LNCS, vol. 4004, pp. 409–426. Springer, Heidelberg (2006)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Deng, Y., Du, W.: Logical, metric, and algorithmic characterisations of probabilistic bisimulation. Technical Report CMU-CS-11-110, Carnegie Mellon University (March 2011)Google Scholar
  6. 6.
    Goldwasser, S., Micali, S.: Probabilistic encryption. J. Comput. Syst. Sci. 28(2), 270–299 (1984)MathSciNetzbMATHCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Jonsson, B., Yi, W., Larsen, K.G.: Probabilistic extensions of process algebras. In: Bergstra, J.A., Ponse, A., Smolka, S.A. (eds.) Handbook of Process Algebra, pp. 685–710. Elsevier, Amsterdam (2001)CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg 2012

Authors and Affiliations

  • Gilles Barthe
    • 1
  • Benjamin Grégoire
    • 2
  • Santiago Zanella Béguelin
    • 3
  1. 1.IMDEA Software InstituteSpain
  2. 2.INRIA Sophia Antipolis - MéditerranéeFrance
  3. 3.Microsoft ResearchUK

Personalised recommendations