Proxy Re-signatures in the Standard Model

  • Sherman S. M. Chow
  • Raphael C. -W. Phan
Part of the Lecture Notes in Computer Science book series (LNCS, volume 5222)

Abstract

This paper studies proxy re-signature schemes. We first classify the expected security notions for proxy re-signature schemes with different properties. We then show how to attack on a recently proposed bidirectional scheme that is purported to be secure without random oracles, and discuss the flaw in their proof. Next, we show how to design a generic unidirectional proxy re-signature scheme using a new primitive called homomorphic compartment signature as the building block. We give a concrete instantiation which yields the first known unidirectional proxy re-signature scheme which is proven secure under standard assumption in the standard model. We also discuss how to incorporate the concept of forward-security into the proxy re-signature paradigm, such that the signing and the transformation are both time-limited.

Keywords

Proxy re-signature compartment signature standard model 

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. 1.
    Ateniese, G., Hohenberger, S.: Proxy Re-signatures: New Definitions, Algorithms, and Applications. In: ACM Conference on Computer and Communications Security, pp. 310–319 (2005)Google Scholar
  2. 2.
    Blaze, M., Bleumer, G., Strauss, M.: Divertible Protocols and Atomic Proxy Cryptography. In: Nyberg, K. (ed.) EUROCRYPT 1998. LNCS, vol. 1403, pp. 127–144. Springer, Heidelberg (1998)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Boneh, D., Boyen, X., Goh, E.-J.: Hierarchical Identity Based Encryption with Constant Size Ciphertext. In: Cramer, R. (ed.) EUROCRYPT 2005. LNCS, vol. 3494, pp. 440–456. Springer, Heidelberg (2005)Google Scholar
  4. 4.
    Boyen, X., Shacham, H., Shen, E., Waters, B.: Forward-Secure Signatures with Untrusted Update. In: ACM Conference on Computer and Communications Security, pp. 191–200. ACM, New York (2006)Google Scholar
  5. 5.
    Boyen, X., Waters, B.: Compact Group Signatures Without Random Oracles. In: Vaudenay, S. (ed.) EUROCRYPT 2006. LNCS, vol. 4004, pp. 427–444. Springer, Heidelberg (2006)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Canetti, R., Halevi, S., Katz, J.: A Forward-Secure Public-Key Encryption Scheme. Journal of Cryptology 20(3) (2007)Google Scholar
  7. 7.
    Gentry, C., Silverberg, A.: Hierarchical ID-Based Cryptography. In: Zheng, Y. (ed.) ASIACRYPT 2002. LNCS, vol. 2501, pp. 548–566. Springer, Heidelberg (2002)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Goldwasser, S., Micali, S., Rivest, R.L.: A Digital Signature Scheme Secure against Adaptive Chosen-Message Attacks. SIAM Journal of Computing 17(2), 281–308 (1988)MATHCrossRefMathSciNetGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Johnson, R., Molnar, D., Song, D.X., Wagner, D.: Homomorphic Signature Schemes. In: Preneel, B. (ed.) CT-RSA 2002. LNCS, vol. 2271, pp. 244–262. Springer, Heidelberg (2002)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Shao, J., Cao, Z., Wang, L., Liang, X.: Proxy Re-signature Schemes Without Random Oracles. In: Srinathan, K., Rangan, C.P., Yung, M. (eds.) INDOCRYPT 2007. LNCS, vol. 4859, pp. 197–209. Springer, Heidelberg (2007)CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg 2008

Authors and Affiliations

  • Sherman S. M. Chow
    • 1
  • Raphael C. -W. Phan
    • 2
  1. 1.Department of Computer Science Courant Institute of Mathematical SciencesNew York UniversityUSA
  2. 2.Electronic & Electrical EngineeringLoughborough UniversityUnited Kingdom

Personalised recommendations