Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Explainable Arguments

  • Conference paper
  • First Online:
Financial Cryptography and Data Security (FC 2022)

Part of the book series: Lecture Notes in Computer Science ((LNCS,volume 13411))

Included in the following conference series:

  • 1025 Accesses

Abstract

We introduce an intriguing new type of argument systems with the additional property of being explainable. Intuitively by explainable, we mean that given any argument under a statement, and any witness, we can produce the random coins for which the \(\textsf{Prove}\) algorithm outputs the same bits of the argument.

This work aims at introducing the foundations for the interactive as well as the non-interactive setting. We show how to build explainable arguments from witness encryption and indistinguishability obfuscation. Finally, we show applications of explainable arguments. Notably we construct deniable chosen-ciphertext secure encryption. Previous deniable encryption scheme achieved only chosen plaintext security.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this chapter

Log in via an institution
Chapter
USD 29.95
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
eBook
USD 89.00
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as EPUB and PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
Softcover Book
USD 119.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Compact, lightweight edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Institutional subscriptions

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. Apon, D., Fan, X., Liu, F.-H.: Deniable attribute based encryption for branching programs from LWE. In: Hirt, M., Smith, A. (eds.) TCC 2016-B, Part II. LNCS, vol. 9986, pp. 299–329. Springer, Heidelberg (2016). https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-662-53644-5_12

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  2. Babai, L., Moran, S.: Arthur-merlin games: a randomized proof system, and a hierarchy of complexity classes. J. Comput. Syst. Sci. 36(2), 254–276 (1988)

    Article  MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  3. Barak, B., et al.: On the (im)possibility of obfuscating programs. In: Kilian, J. (ed.) CRYPTO 2001. LNCS, vol. 2139, pp. 1–18. Springer, Heidelberg (2001). https://doi.org/10.1007/3-540-44647-8_1

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  4. Barak, B., Ong, S.J., Vadhan, S.: Derandomization in cryptography. In: Boneh, D. (ed.) CRYPTO 2003. LNCS, vol. 2729, pp. 299–315. Springer, Heidelberg (2003). https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-540-45146-4_18

    Chapter  MATH  Google Scholar 

  5. Bellare, M., Rogaway, P.: Optimal asymmetric encryption. In: De Santis, A. (ed.) EUROCRYPT 1994. LNCS, vol. 950, pp. 92–111. Springer, Heidelberg (1995). https://doi.org/10.1007/BFb0053428

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  6. Benaloh, J.C., Tuinstra, D.: Receipt-free secret-ballot elections (extended abstract). In: 26th ACM STOC, pp. 544–553. ACM Press, May 1994

    Google Scholar 

  7. Bendlin, R., Nielsen, J.B., Nordholt, P.S., Orlandi, C.: Lower and upper bounds for deniable public-key encryption. In: Lee, D.H., Wang, X. (eds.) ASIACRYPT 2011. LNCS, vol. 7073, pp. 125–142. Springer, Heidelberg (2011). https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-642-25385-0_7

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  8. Bitansky, N., Choudhuri, A.R.: Characterizing deterministic-prover zero knowledge. In: Pass, R., Pietrzak, K. (eds.) TCC 2020, Part I. LNCS, vol. 12550, pp. 535–566. Springer, Cham (2020). https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-64375-1_19

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  9. Bitansky, N., Paneth, O.: ZAPs and non-interactive witness indistinguishability from indistinguishability obfuscation. In: Dodis, Y., Nielsen, J.B. (eds.) TCC 2015, Part II. LNCS, vol. 9015, pp. 401–427. Springer, Heidelberg (2015). https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-662-46497-7_16

    Chapter  MATH  Google Scholar 

  10. Blum, M., Feldman, P., Micali, S.: Non-interactive zero-knowledge and its applications (extended abstract). In: 20th ACM STOC, pp. 103–112. ACM Press, May 1988

    Google Scholar 

  11. Bohli, J.-M., Steinwandt, R.: Deniable group key agreement. In: Nguyen, P.Q. (ed.) VIETCRYPT 2006. LNCS, vol. 4341, pp. 298–311. Springer, Heidelberg (2006). https://doi.org/10.1007/11958239_20

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  12. Boneh, D., Ishai, Y., Sahai, A., Wu, D.J.: Quasi-optimal SNARGs via linear multi-prover interactive proofs. In: Nielsen, J.B., Rijmen, V. (eds.) EUROCRYPT 2018, Part III. LNCS, vol. 10822, pp. 222–255. Springer, Cham (2018). https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-78372-7_8

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  13. Boneh, D., Waters, B.: Constrained pseudorandom functions and their applications. In: Sako, K., Sarkar, P. (eds.) ASIACRYPT 2013, Part II. LNCS, vol. 8270, pp. 280–300. Springer, Heidelberg (2013). https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-642-42045-0_15

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  14. Boyle, E., Goldwasser, S., Ivan, I.: Functional signatures and pseudorandom functions. In: Krawczyk, H. (ed.) PKC 2014. LNCS, vol. 8383, pp. 501–519. Springer, Heidelberg (2014). https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-642-54631-0_29

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  15. Canetti, R., Dwork, C., Naor, M., Ostrovsky, R.: Deniable encryption. In: Kaliski, B.S. (ed.) CRYPTO 1997. LNCS, vol. 1294, pp. 90–104. Springer, Heidelberg (1997). https://doi.org/10.1007/BFb0052229

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  16. Canetti, R., Park, S., Poburinnaya, O.: Fully deniable interactive encryption. In: Micciancio, D., Ristenpart, T. (eds.) CRYPTO 2020, Part I. LNCS, vol. 12170, pp. 807–835. Springer, Cham (2020). https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-56784-2_27

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  17. Chaidos, P., Cortier, V., Fuchsbauer, G., Galindo, D.: BeleniosRF: a non-interactive receipt-free electronic voting scheme. In: Weippl, E.R., Katzenbeisser, S., Kruegel, C., Myers, A.C., Halevi, S. (eds.) ACM CCS 2016, pp. 1614–1625. ACM Press, October 2016

    Google Scholar 

  18. Chakraborty, S., Prabhakaran, M., Wichs, D.: Witness maps and applications. In: Kiayias, A., Kohlweiss, M., Wallden, P., Zikas, V. (eds.) PKC 2020, Part I. LNCS, vol. 12110, pp. 220–246. Springer, Cham (2020). https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-45374-9_8

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  19. Cramer, R., Shoup, V.: Signature schemes based on the strong RSA assumption. In: Motiwalla, J., Tsudik, G. (eds.) ACM CCS 1999, pp. 46–51. ACM Press, November 1999

    Google Scholar 

  20. Dachman-Soled, D.: On the impossibility of sender-deniable public key encryption. Cryptology ePrint Archive, Report 2012/727 (2012). https://eprint.iacr.org/2012/727

  21. Dachman-Soled, D.: A black-box construction of a CCA2 encryption scheme from a plaintext aware (sPA1) encryption scheme. In: Krawczyk, H. (ed.) PKC 2014. LNCS, vol. 8383, pp. 37–55. Springer, Heidelberg (2014). https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-642-54631-0_3

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  22. De Caro, A., Iovino, V., O’Neill, A.: Deniable functional encryption. In: Cheng, C.-M., Chung, K.-M., Persiano, G., Yang, B.-Y. (eds.) PKC 2016, Part II. LNCS, vol. 9614, pp. 196–222. Springer, Heidelberg (2016). https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-662-49384-7_8

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  23. De Santis, A., Micali, S., Persiano, G.: Non-interactive zero-knowledge proof systems. In: Pomerance, C. (ed.) CRYPTO 1987. LNCS, vol. 293, pp. 52–72. Springer, Heidelberg (1988). https://doi.org/10.1007/3-540-48184-2_5

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  24. Di Raimondo, M., Gennaro, R.: New approaches for deniable authentication. In: Atluri, V., Meadows, C., Juels, A. (eds.) ACM CCS 2005, pp. 112–121. ACM Press, November 2005

    Google Scholar 

  25. Di Raimondo, M., Gennaro, R.: New approaches for deniable authentication. J. Cryptol. 22(4), 572–615 (2009)

    Article  MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  26. Di Raimondo, M., Gennaro, R., Krawczyk, H.: Deniable authentication and key exchange. In: Juels, A., Wright, R.N., Capitani di Vimercati, S.D. (eds.) ACM CCS 2006, pp. 400–409. ACM Press, October/November 2006

    Google Scholar 

  27. Dodis, Y., Fiore, D.: Interactive encryption and message authentication. In: Abdalla, M., De Prisco, R. (eds.) SCN 2014. LNCS, vol. 8642, pp. 494–513. Springer, Cham (2014). https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-10879-7_28

    Chapter  MATH  Google Scholar 

  28. Dodis, Y., Katz, J., Smith, A., Walfish, S.: Composability and on-line deniability of authentication. In: Reingold, O. (ed.) TCC 2009. LNCS, vol. 5444, pp. 146–162. Springer, Heidelberg (2009). https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-642-00457-5_10

    Chapter  MATH  Google Scholar 

  29. Dodis, Y., Yampolskiy, A.: A verifiable random function with short proofs and keys. In: Vaudenay, S. (ed.) PKC 2005. LNCS, vol. 3386, pp. 416–431. Springer, Heidelberg (2005). https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-540-30580-4_28

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  30. Dolev, D., Dwork, C., Naor, M.: Non-malleable cryptography (extended abstract). In: 23rd ACM STOC, pp. 542–552. ACM Press, May 1991

    Google Scholar 

  31. Dwork, C., Naor, M.: Zaps and their applications. In: 41st FOCS, pp. 283–293. IEEE Computer Society Press, November 2000

    Google Scholar 

  32. Dwork, C., Naor, M., Sahai, A.: Concurrent zero-knowledge. In: 30th ACM STOC, pp. 409–418. ACM Press, May 1998

    Google Scholar 

  33. Faonio, A., Nielsen, J.B., Venturi, D.: Predictable arguments of knowledge. In: Fehr, S. (ed.) PKC 2017, Part I. LNCS, vol. 10174, pp. 121–150. Springer, Heidelberg (2017). https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-662-54365-8_6

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  34. Feige, U., Lapidot, D., Shamir, A.: Multiple noninteractive zero knowledge proofs under general assumptions. SIAM J. Comput. 29(1), 1–28 (1999)

    Article  MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  35. Fiat, A., Shamir, A.: How to prove yourself: practical solutions to identification and signature problems. In: Odlyzko, A.M. (ed.) CRYPTO 1986. LNCS, vol. 263, pp. 186–194. Springer, Heidelberg (1987). https://doi.org/10.1007/3-540-47721-7_12

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  36. Garg, S., Gentry, C., Sahai, A., Waters, B.: Witness encryption and its applications. In: Boneh, D., Roughgarden, T., Feigenbaum, J. (eds.) 45th ACM STOC, pp. 467–476. ACM Press, June 2013

    Google Scholar 

  37. Gennaro, R., Halevi, S., Rabin, T.: Secure hash-and-sign signatures without the random oracle. In: Stern, J. (ed.) EUROCRYPT 1999. LNCS, vol. 1592, pp. 123–139. Springer, Heidelberg (1999). https://doi.org/10.1007/3-540-48910-X_9

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  38. Goldreich, O.: Basing non-interactive zero-knowledge on (enhanced) trapdoor permutations: the state of the art. In: Goldreich, O. (ed.) Studies in Complexity and Cryptography. Miscellanea on the Interplay between Randomness and Computation. LNCS, vol. 6650, pp. 406–421. Springer, Heidelberg (2011). https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-642-22670-0_28

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  39. Goldreich, O., Levin, L.A.: A hard-core predicate for all one-way functions. In: 21st ACM STOC, pp. 25–32. ACM Press, May 1989

    Google Scholar 

  40. Goldwasser, S., Kalai, Y.T., Popa, R.A., Vaikuntanathan, V., Zeldovich, N.: How to run turing machines on encrypted data. In: Canetti, R., Garay, J.A. (eds.) CRYPTO 2013, Part II. LNCS, vol. 8043, pp. 536–553. Springer, Heidelberg (2013). https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-642-40084-1_30

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  41. Goldwasser, S., Klein, S., Wichs, D.: The edited truth. In: Kalai, Y., Reyzin, L. (eds.) TCC 2017, Part I. LNCS, vol. 10677, pp. 305–340. Springer, Cham (2017). https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-70500-2_11

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  42. Goldwasser, S., Ostrovsky, R.: Invariant signatures and non-interactive zero-knowledge proofs are equivalent. In: Brickell, E.F. (ed.) CRYPTO 1992. LNCS, vol. 740, pp. 228–245. Springer, Heidelberg (1993). https://doi.org/10.1007/3-540-48071-4_16

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  43. Groth, J., Ostrovsky, R., Sahai, A.: Non-interactive zaps and new techniques for NIZK. In: Dwork, C. (ed.) CRYPTO 2006. LNCS, vol. 4117, pp. 97–111. Springer, Heidelberg (2006). https://doi.org/10.1007/11818175_6

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  44. Groth, J., Ostrovsky, R., Sahai, A.: Perfect non-interactive zero knowledge for NP. In: Vaudenay, S. (ed.) EUROCRYPT 2006. LNCS, vol. 4004, pp. 339–358. Springer, Heidelberg (2006). https://doi.org/10.1007/11761679_21

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  45. Hanzlik, L., Kluczniak, K.: Explainable arguments. Cryptology ePrint Archive, Report 2021/xxxx (2021, to appear). https://ia.cr/2021/xxxx

  46. Hanzlik, L., Kluczniak, K., Kutyłowski, M., Krzywiecki, Ł: Mutual restricted identification. In: Katsikas, S., Agudo, I. (eds.) EuroPKI 2013. LNCS, vol. 8341, pp. 119–133. Springer, Heidelberg (2014). https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-642-53997-8_8

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  47. Hirt, M., Sako, K.: Efficient receipt-free voting based on homomorphic encryption. In: Preneel, B. (ed.) EUROCRYPT 2000. LNCS, vol. 1807, pp. 539–556. Springer, Heidelberg (2000). https://doi.org/10.1007/3-540-45539-6_38

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  48. Jakobsson, M., Sako, K., Impagliazzo, R.: Designated verifier proofs and their applications. In: Maurer, U. (ed.) EUROCRYPT 1996. LNCS, vol. 1070, pp. 143–154. Springer, Heidelberg (1996). https://doi.org/10.1007/3-540-68339-9_13

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  49. Jiang, S., Safavi-Naini, R.: An efficient deniable key exchange protocol (extended abstract). In: Tsudik, G. (ed.) FC 2008. LNCS, vol. 5143, pp. 47–52. Springer, Heidelberg (2008). https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-540-85230-8_4

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  50. Kiayias, A., Papadopoulos, S., Triandopoulos, N., Zacharias, T.: Delegatable pseudorandom functions and applications. In: Sadeghi, A.-R., Gligor, V.D., Yung, M. (eds.) ACM CCS 2013, pp. 669–684. ACM Press, November 2013

    Google Scholar 

  51. Krzywiecki, L., Kluczniak, K., Kozieł, P., Panwar, N.: Privacy-oriented dependency via deniable sigma protocol. Comput. Secur. 79, 53–67 (2018)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  52. Lysyanskaya, A.: Unique signatures and verifiable random functions from the DH-DDH separation. In: Yung, M. (ed.) CRYPTO 2002. LNCS, vol. 2442, pp. 597–612. Springer, Heidelberg (2002). https://doi.org/10.1007/3-540-45708-9_38

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  53. Micali, S., Rabin, M.O., Vadhan, S.P.: Verifiable random functions. In: 40th FOCS, pp. 120–130. IEEE Computer Society Press, October 1999

    Google Scholar 

  54. Moran, T., Naor, M.: Receipt-free universally-verifiable voting with everlasting privacy. In: Dwork, C. (ed.) CRYPTO 2006. LNCS, vol. 4117, pp. 373–392. Springer, Heidelberg (2006). https://doi.org/10.1007/11818175_22

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  55. Naor, M.: Deniable ring authentication. In: Yung, M. (ed.) CRYPTO 2002. LNCS, vol. 2442, pp. 481–498. Springer, Heidelberg (2002). https://doi.org/10.1007/3-540-45708-9_31

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  56. Naor, M., Yung, M.: Public-key cryptosystems provably secure against chosen ciphertext attacks. In: 22nd ACM STOC, pp. 427–437. ACM Press, May 1990

    Google Scholar 

  57. O’Neill, A., Peikert, C., Waters, B.: Bi-deniable public-key encryption. In: Rogaway, P. (ed.) CRYPTO 2011. LNCS, vol. 6841, pp. 525–542. Springer, Heidelberg (2011). https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-642-22792-9_30

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  58. Park, S., Sealfon, A.: It wasn’t me! Repudiability and claimability of ring signatures. In: Boldyreva, A., Micciancio, D. (eds.) CRYPTO 2019, Part III. LNCS, vol. 11694, pp. 159–190. Springer, Cham (2019). https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-26954-8_6

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  59. Pass, R.: On deniability in the common reference string and random oracle model. In: Boneh, D. (ed.) CRYPTO 2003. LNCS, vol. 2729, pp. 316–337. Springer, Heidelberg (2003). https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-540-45146-4_19

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  60. Peikert, C., Shiehian, S.: Noninteractive zero knowledge for NP from (plain) learning with errors. In: Boldyreva, A., Micciancio, D. (eds.) CRYPTO 2019, Part I. LNCS, vol. 11692, pp. 89–114. Springer, Cham (2019). https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-26948-7_4

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  61. 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). https://doi.org/10.1007/3-540-45682-1_32

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  62. Ryan, P.Y.A., Rønne, P.B., Iovino, V.: Selene: voting with transparent verifiability and coercion-mitigation. In: Clark, J., Meiklejohn, S., Ryan, P.Y.A., Wallach, D., Brenner, M., Rohloff, K. (eds.) FC 2016. LNCS, vol. 9604, pp. 176–192. Springer, Heidelberg (2016). https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-662-53357-4_12

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  63. Sahai, A., Waters, B.: How to use indistinguishability obfuscation: deniable encryption, and more. In: Shmoys, D.B. (ed.) 46th ACM STOC, pp. 475–484. ACM Press, May/June (2014)

    Google Scholar 

  64. Sako, K., Kilian, J.: Receipt-free mix-type voting scheme. In: Guillou, L.C., Quisquater, J.-J. (eds.) EUROCRYPT 1995. LNCS, vol. 921, pp. 393–403. Springer, Heidelberg (1995). https://doi.org/10.1007/3-540-49264-X_32

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  65. Unger, N., Goldberg, I.: Improved strongly deniable authenticated key exchanges for secure messaging. Proc. Priv. Enhanc. Technol. 2018(1), 21–66 (2018)

    Google Scholar 

  66. Unger, N., Goldberg, I.: Deniable key exchanges for secure messaging. In: Ray, I., Li, N., Kruegel, C. (eds.) ACM CCS 2015, pp. 1211–1223. ACM Press, October 2015

    Google Scholar 

  67. Vatandas, N., Gennaro, R., Ithurburn, B., Krawczyk, H.: On the cryptographic deniability of the signal protocol. In: Conti, M., Zhou, J., Casalicchio, E., Spognardi, A. (eds.) ACNS 2020, Part II. LNCS, vol. 12147, pp. 188–209. Springer, Cham (2020). https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-57878-7_10

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  68. Yamada, S., Attrapadung, N., Santoso, B., Schuldt, J.C.N., Hanaoka, G., Kunihiro, N.: Verifiable predicate encryption and applications to CCA security and anonymous predicate authentication. In: Fischlin, M., Buchmann, J., Manulis, M. (eds.) PKC 2012. LNCS, vol. 7293, pp. 243–261. Springer, Heidelberg (2012). https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-642-30057-8_15

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  69. Yao, A.C.-C., Zhao, Y.: Deniable internet key exchange. In: Zhou, J., Yung, M. (eds.) ACNS 2010. LNCS, vol. 6123, pp. 329–348. Springer, Heidelberg (2010). https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-642-13708-2_20

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgements

This work has been partially funded/supported by the German Ministry for Education and Research through funding for the project CISPA-Stanford Center for Cybersecurity (Funding numbers: 16KIS0762 and 16KIS0927).

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. CISPA Helmholtz Center for Information Security, Saarbrücken, Germany

    Lucjan Hanzlik & Kamil Kluczniak

  2. Stanford University, Stanford, USA

    Kamil Kluczniak

Authors
  1. Lucjan Hanzlik
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Kamil Kluczniak
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Lucjan Hanzlik .

Editor information

Editors and Affiliations

  1. Technion - Israel Institute of Technology, Haifa, Israel

    Ittay Eyal

  2. Texas A&M University, College Station, TX, USA

    Juan Garay

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2022 International Financial Cryptography Association

About this paper

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this paper

Hanzlik, L., Kluczniak, K. (2022). Explainable Arguments. In: Eyal, I., Garay, J. (eds) Financial Cryptography and Data Security. FC 2022. Lecture Notes in Computer Science, vol 13411. Springer, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-031-18283-9_4

Download citation

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-031-18283-9_4

  • Published:

  • Publisher Name: Springer, Cham

  • Print ISBN: 978-3-031-18282-2

  • Online ISBN: 978-3-031-18283-9

  • eBook Packages: Computer ScienceComputer Science (R0)

Publish with us

Policies and ethics

Search

Navigation