Efficient Memory Bound Puzzles Using Pattern Databases

  • Sujata Doshi
  • Fabian Monrose
  • Aviel D. Rubin
Part of the Lecture Notes in Computer Science book series (LNCS, volume 3989)


CPU bound client puzzles have been suggested as a defense mechanism against connection depletion attacks. However, the wide disparity in CPU speeds prevents such puzzles from being globally deployed. Recently, Abadi et. al. [1] and Dwork et. al. [2] addressed this limitation by showing that memory access times vary much less than CPU speeds, and hence offer a viable alternative. In this paper, we further investigate the applicability of memory bound puzzles from a new perspective and propose constructions based on heuristic search methods. Our constructions are derived from a more algorithmic foundation, and as a result, allow us to easily tune parameters that impact puzzle creation and verification costs. Moreover, unlike prior approaches, we address client-side cost and present an extension that allows memory constrained clients (e.g., PDAs) to implement our construction in a secure fashion.


Goal State Random Oracle Server Side Multiple Goal Random Early Detection 
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.


Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.


  1. 1.
    Abadi, M., Burrows, M., Manasse, M., Wobber, T.: Moderately hard, memory-bound functions. In: Proceedings of Network and Distributed Systems Security Symposium, San Diego, California, USA, 2003, pp. 107–121 (February 2003)Google Scholar
  2. 2.
    Dwork, C., Goldberg, A., Naor, M.: On memory-bound functions for fighting spam. In: Proceedings of the 23rd Annual International Cryptology Conference, pp. 426–444 (2003)Google Scholar
  3. 3.
    Juels, A., Brainard, J.: Client puzzles: A cryptographic countermeasure against connection depletion attacks. In: Proceedings of Networks and Distributed Security Systems, pp. 151–165 (February 1999)Google Scholar
  4. 4.
    Dean, D., Stubblefield, A.: Using client puzzles to protect TLS. In: Proceedings of the 10th USENIX Security Symposium, pp. 1–8 (August 2001)Google Scholar
  5. 5.
    Wang, X., Reiter, M.K.: Defending against Denial-of-Service attacks with puzzle auctions. In: Proceedings of the IEEE Symposium on Security and Privacy, pp. 78–92. IEEE Computer Society, Los Alamitos (2003)Google Scholar
  6. 6.
    Waters, B., Juels, A., Halderman, J.A., Felten, E.W.: New client puzzle outsourcing techniques for DoS resistance. In: Proceedings of the 11th ACM conference on Computer and Communications Security, pp. 246–256 (2004)Google Scholar
  7. 7.
    Bernstein, D.J.: SYN cookies (1996), http://cr.yp.to/syncookies.html
  8. 8.
    Floyd, S., Jacobson, V.: Random early detection gateways for congestion avoidance. IEEE/ACM Transactions on Networking 1(4), 397–413 (1993)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Loyd, S.: Mathematical Puzzles of Sam Loyd. Dover (1959), Selected and Edited by Martin GardnerGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Singmaster, D.: Notes on Rubik’s Magic Cube. Enslow Pub. Inc. (1981)Google Scholar
  11. 11.
    Korf, R.: Finding Optimal Solutions to Rubik’s Cube Using Pattern Databases. In: Proceedings of the 14th National Conference on Artificial Intelligence and 9th Innovative Applications of Artificial Intelligence Conference, Rhode Island pp. 700–705. AAAI Press/MIT Press (1997)Google Scholar
  12. 12.
    Hern’advolgyi, I.T., Holte, R.C.: Experiments with automatically created memory-based heuristics. In: Choueiry, B.Y., Walsh, T. (eds.) SARA 2000. LNCS, vol. 1864, pp. 281–290. Springer, Heidelberg (2000)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Bocan, V.: Threshold puzzles: The evolution of DoS-resistant authentication. Periodica Politechnica, Transactions on Automatic Control and Computer Science 49(63) (2004)Google Scholar
  14. 14.
    Merkle, R.C.: Secure communications over insecure channels. Communications of ACM 21(4), 294–299 (1978)CrossRefMATHGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Back, A.: Hash cash - A Denial of Service Counter-Measure. Technical report (2002), http://www.hashcash.org/
  16. 16.
    Wang, X., Reiter, M.K.: Mitigating bandwidth-exhaustion attacks using congestion puzzles. In: Proceedings of the 11th ACM conference on Computer and Communications Security, pp. 257–267. ACM Press, New York (2004)Google Scholar
  17. 17.
    Rosenthal, D.S.H.: On the cost distribution of a memory bound function. Computing Research Repository. cs.CR/0311005 (2003)Google Scholar
  18. 18.
    Hart, P.E., Nilsson, N.J., Raphael, B.: A formal basis for the heuristic determination of minimum cost paths. IEEE Transactions on Systems Science and Cybernetics 4(2), 100–107 (1968)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. 19.
    Hart, P.E., Nilsson, N.J., Raphael, B.: Correction to a formal basis for the heuristic determination of minimum cost paths. ACM SIGART Bulletin 37, 28–29 (1972)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. 20.
    Parberry, I.: A real-time algorithm for the (n 2 − 1)-puzzle. Information Processing Letters 56(1), 23–28 (1995)MathSciNetCrossRefMATHGoogle Scholar
  21. 21.
    Culberson, J.C., Schaeffer, J.: Searching with pattern databases. In: McCalla, G.I. (ed.) Canadian AI 1996. LNCS, vol. 1081, pp. 402–416. Springer, Heidelberg (1996)Google Scholar
  22. 22.
    Holte, R.C., Hern’advolgyi, I.T.: A space-time tradeoff for memory-based heuristics. In: Proceedings of the 16th national conference on Artificial Intelligence and the 11th Innovative Applications of Artificial Intelligence conference, pp. 704–709, American Association for Artificial Intelligence, Menlo Park (1999)Google Scholar
  23. 23.
    FIPS: The Keyed-Hash Message Authentication Code (HMAC) (2002), http://csrc.nist.gov/publications/fips/fips198/fips-198a.pdf
  24. 24.
    Korf, R.E.: Recent progress in the design and analysis of admissible heuristic functions. In: Proceedings of the 17th National Conference on Artificial Intelligence and 12th Conference on Innovative Applications of Artificial Intelligence, pp. 1165–1170. AAAI Press / The MIT Press (2000)Google Scholar
  25. 25.
    Korf, R.E., Reid, M.: Complexity analysis admissible heuristic search. In: Proceedings of the 15th national/10th conference on Artificial Intelligence/Innovative Applications of Artificial intelligence, pp. 305–310, American Association for Artificial Intelligence, Menlo Park (1998)Google Scholar
  26. 26.
    Goldreich, O., Goldwasser, S., Micali, S.: How to construct random functions. J. ACM 33(4), 792–807 (1986)MathSciNetCrossRefMATHGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg 2006

Authors and Affiliations

  • Sujata Doshi
    • 1
  • Fabian Monrose
    • 1
  • Aviel D. Rubin
    • 1
  1. 1.Computer Science DepartmentJohns Hopkins UniversityUSA

Personalised recommendations