Adapting Lyubashevsky’s Signature Schemes to the Ring Signature Setting

  • Carlos Aguilar Melchor
  • Slim Bettaieb
  • Xavier Boyen
  • Laurent Fousse
  • Philippe Gaborit
Part of the Lecture Notes in Computer Science book series (LNCS, volume 7918)

Abstract

Basing signature schemes on strong lattice problems has been a long standing open issue. Today, two families of lattice-based signature schemes are known: the ones based on the hash-and-sign construction of Gentry et al.; and Lyubashevsky’s schemes, which are based on the Fiat-Shamir framework.

In this paper we show for the first time how to adapt the schemes of Lyubashevsky to the ring signature setting. In particular we transform the scheme of ASIACRYPT 2009 into a ring signature scheme that provides strong properties of security under the random oracle model. Anonymity is ensured in the sense that signatures of different users are within negligible statistical distance even under full key exposure. In fact, the scheme satisfies a notion which is stronger than the classical full key exposure setting as even if the keypair of the signing user is adversarially chosen, the statistical distance between signatures of different users remains negligible.

Considering unforgeability, the best lattice-based ring signature schemes provide either unforgeability against arbitrary chosen subring attacks or insider corruption in log-sized rings. In this paper we present two variants of our scheme. In the basic one, unforgeability is ensured in those two settings. Increasing signature and key sizes by a factor k (typically 80 − 100), we provide a variant in which unforgeability is ensured against insider corruption attacks for arbitrary rings. The technique used is pretty general and can be adapted to other existing schemes.

Keywords

Ring signatures lattices 

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. 1.
    Rivest, R.L., Shamir, A., Tauman, Y.: How to leak a secret. In: Boyd, C. (ed.) ASIACRYPT 2001. LNCS, vol. 2248, pp. 552–565. Springer, Heidelberg (2001)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Bender, A., Katz, J., Morselli, R.: Ring signatures: Stronger definitions, and constructions without random oracles. In: Halevi, S., Rabin, T. (eds.) TCC 2006. LNCS, vol. 3876, pp. 60–79. Springer, Heidelberg (2006)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Chaum, D., van Heyst, E.: Group signatures. In: Davies, D.W. (ed.) EUROCRYPT 1991. LNCS, vol. 547, pp. 257–265. Springer, Heidelberg (1991)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Dodis, Y., Kiayias, A., Nicolosi, A., Shoup, V.: Anonymous identification in ad hoc groups. In: Cachin, C., Camenisch, J.L. (eds.) EUROCRYPT 2004. LNCS, vol. 3027, pp. 609–626. Springer, Heidelberg (2004)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Abe, M., Ohkubo, M., Suzuki, K.: 1-out-of-n signatures from a variety of keys. In: Zheng, Y. (ed.) ASIACRYPT 2002. LNCS, vol. 2501, pp. 415–432. Springer, Heidelberg (2002)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Herranz, J., Sáez, G.: Forking lemmas for ring signature schemes. In: Johansson, T., Maitra, S. (eds.) INDOCRYPT 2003. LNCS, vol. 2904, pp. 266–279. Springer, Heidelberg (2003)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Shacham, H., Waters, B.: Efficient ring signatures without random oracles. In: Okamoto, T., Wang, X. (eds.) PKC 2007. LNCS, vol. 4450, pp. 166–180. Springer, Heidelberg (2007)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Zhang, F., Safavi-Naini, R., Susilo, W.: An efficient signature scheme from bilinear pairings and its applications. In: Bao, F., Deng, R., Zhou, J. (eds.) PKC 2004. LNCS, vol. 2947, pp. 277–290. Springer, Heidelberg (2004)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Boyen, X.: Mesh signatures. In: Naor, M. (ed.) EUROCRYPT 2007. LNCS, vol. 4515, pp. 210–227. Springer, Heidelberg (2007)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Brakerski, Z., Kalai, Y.T.: A framework for efficient signatures, ring signatures and identity based encryption in the standard model. Technical report, Cryptology ePrint Archive, Report 2010086 (2010)Google Scholar
  11. 11.
    Gentry, C., Peikert, C., Vaikuntanathan, V.: Trapdoors for hard lattices and new cryptographic constructions. In: Proceedings of the 40th Annual ACM Symposium on Theory of Computing, pp. 197–206. ACM (2008)Google Scholar
  12. 12.
    Cash, D., Hofheinz, D., Kiltz, E., Peikert, C.: Bonsai trees, or how to delegate a lattice basis. In: Gilbert, H. (ed.) EUROCRYPT 2010. LNCS, vol. 6110, pp. 523–552. Springer, Heidelberg (2010)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Wang, J., Sun, B.: Ring signature schemes from lattice basis delegation. In: Qing, S., Susilo, W., Wang, G., Liu, D. (eds.) ICICS 2011. LNCS, vol. 7043, pp. 15–28. Springer, Heidelberg (2011)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Micciancio, D., Peikert, C.: Trapdoors for lattices: Simpler, tighter, faster, smaller. In: Pointcheval, D., Johansson, T. (eds.) EUROCRYPT 2012. LNCS, vol. 7237, pp. 700–718. Springer, Heidelberg (2012)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Kawachi, A., Tanaka, K., Xagawa, K.: Concurrently secure identification schemes based on the worst-case hardness of lattice problems. In: Pieprzyk, J. (ed.) ASIACRYPT 2008. LNCS, vol. 5350, pp. 372–389. Springer, Heidelberg (2008)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Cayrel, P.-L., Lindner, R., Rückert, M., Silva, R.: A lattice-based threshold ring signature scheme. In: Abdalla, M., Barreto, P.S.L.M. (eds.) LATINCRYPT 2010. LNCS, vol. 6212, pp. 255–272. Springer, Heidelberg (2010)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    Stern, J.: A new identification scheme based on syndrome decoding. In: Stinson, D.R. (ed.) CRYPTO 1993. LNCS, vol. 773, pp. 13–21. Springer, Heidelberg (1994)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
    Aguilar Melchor, C., Cayrel, P.L., Gaborit, P., Laguillaumie, F.: A new efficient threshold ring signature scheme based on coding theory. IEEE Transactions on Information Theory 57(7), 4833–4842 (2010)MathSciNetCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. 19.
    Lyubashevsky, V.: Towards practical lattice-based cryptography. PhD thesis, University of California, San Diego (2008)Google Scholar
  20. 20.
    Lyubashevsky, V.: Fiat-shamir with aborts: Applications to lattice and factoring-based signatures. In: Matsui, M. (ed.) ASIACRYPT 2009. LNCS, vol. 5912, pp. 598–616. Springer, Heidelberg (2009)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. 21.
    Lyubashevsky, V.: Lattice signatures without trapdoors. In: Pointcheval, D., Johansson, T. (eds.) EUROCRYPT 2012. LNCS, vol. 7237, pp. 738–755. Springer, Heidelberg (2012)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. 22.
    Lenstra, A.K., Hughes, J.P., Augier, M., Bos, J.W., Kleinjung, T., Wachter, C.: Ron was wrong, whit is right. Cryptology ePrint Archive, Report 2012/064 (2012), http://eprint.iacr.org/
  23. 23.
    Lyubashevsky, V., Micciancio, D.: Generalized compact knapsacks are collision resistant. In: Bugliesi, M., Preneel, B., Sassone, V., Wegener, I. (eds.) ICALP 2006. LNCS, vol. 4052, pp. 144–155. Springer, Heidelberg (2006)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. 24.
    Micciancio, D., Goldwasser, S.: Complexity of Lattice Problems: a cryptographic perspective. The Kluwer International Series in Engineering and Computer Science, vol. 671. Kluwer Academic Publishers, Boston (2002)MATHCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. 25.
    Stehlé, D., Steinfeld, R., Tanaka, K., Xagawa, K.: Efficient public key encryption based on ideal lattices. In: Matsui, M. (ed.) ASIACRYPT 2009. LNCS, vol. 5912, pp. 617–635. Springer, Heidelberg (2009)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. 26.
    Bennett, C.H., Brassard, G., Robert, J.M.: Privacy amplification by public discussion. SIAM J. Comput. 17(2), 210–229 (1988)MathSciNetCrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg 2013

Authors and Affiliations

  • Carlos Aguilar Melchor
    • 1
  • Slim Bettaieb
    • 1
  • Xavier Boyen
    • 2
  • Laurent Fousse
    • 3
  • Philippe Gaborit
    • 1
  1. 1.XLIM-DMIUniversité de LimogesFrance
  2. 2.Queensland University of TechnologyBrisbaneAustralia
  3. 3.Laboratoire Jean-KuntzmannUniversité de GrenobleFrance

Personalised recommendations