Advertisement

Improved Security for Linearly Homomorphic Signatures: A Generic Framework

  • David Mandell Freeman
Part of the Lecture Notes in Computer Science book series (LNCS, volume 7293)

Abstract

We propose a general framework that converts (ordinary) signature schemes having certain properties into linearly homomorphic signature schemes, i.e., schemes that allow authentication of linear functions on signed data. The security of the homomorphic scheme follows from the same computational assumption as is used to prove security of the underlying signature scheme. We show that the following signature schemes have the required properties and thus give rise to secure homomorphic signatures in the standard model:

  • The scheme of Waters (Eurocrypt 2005), secure under the computational Diffie-Hellman asumption in bilinear groups.

  • The scheme of Boneh and Boyen (Eurocrypt 2004, J. Cryptology 2008), secure under the q-strong Diffie-Hellman assumption in bilinear groups.

  • The scheme of Gennaro, Halevi, and Rabin (Eurocrypt 1999), secure under the strong RSA assumption.

  • The scheme of Hohenberger and Waters (Crypto 2009), secure under the RSA assumption.

Our systems not only allow weaker security assumptions than were previously available for homomorphic signatures in the standard model, but also are secure in a model that allows a stronger adversary than in other proposed schemes.

Our framework also leads to efficient linearly homomorphic signatures that are secure against our stronger adversary under weak assumptions (CDH or RSA) in the random oracle model; all previous proofs of security in the random oracle model break down completely when faced with our stronger adversary.

Keywords

Homomorphic signatures standard model bilinear groups CDH RSA 

References

  1. 1.
    Ahlswede, R., Cai, N., Li, S., Yeung, R.: Network information flow. IEEE Transactions on Information Theory 46(4), 1204–1216 (2000)MathSciNetMATHCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Attrapadung, N., Libert, B.: Homomorphic Network Coding Signatures in the Standard Model. In: Catalano, D., Fazio, N., Gennaro, R., Nicolosi, A. (eds.) PKC 2011. LNCS, vol. 6571, pp. 17–34. Springer, Heidelberg (2011)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Boneh, D., Boyen, X.: Efficient Selective-ID Secure Identity-Based Encryption Without Random Oracles. In: Cachin, C., Camenisch, J. (eds.) EUROCRYPT 2004. LNCS, vol. 3027, pp. 223–238. Springer, Heidelberg (2004)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Boneh, D., Boyen, X.: Short signatures without random oracles and the SDH assumption in bilinear groups. J. Cryptology 21, 149–177 (2008); extended abstract in Advances in Cryptology — EUROCRYPT 2004 Google Scholar
  5. 5.
    Boneh, D., Freeman, D., Katz, J., Waters, B.: Signing a Linear Subspace: Signature Schemes for Network Coding. In: Jarecki, S., Tsudik, G. (eds.) PKC 2009. LNCS, vol. 5443, pp. 68–87. Springer, Heidelberg (2009)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Boneh, D., Freeman, D.M.: Homomorphic Signatures for Polynomial Functions. In: Paterson, K.G. (ed.) EUROCRYPT 2011. LNCS, vol. 6632, pp. 149–168. Springer, Heidelberg (2011), full version available at http://eprint.iacr.org/2011/018 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Boneh, D., Freeman, D.M.: Linearly Homomorphic Signatures over Binary Fields and New Tools for Lattice-Based Signatures. In: Catalano, D., Fazio, N., Gennaro, R., Nicolosi, A. (eds.) PKC 2011. LNCS, vol. 6571, pp. 1–16. Springer, Heidelberg (2011), Full version available at http://eprint.iacr.org/2010/453 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Catalano, D., Fiore, D., Warinschi, B.: Adaptive Pseudo-free Groups and Applications. In: Paterson, K.G. (ed.) EUROCRYPT 2011. LNCS, vol. 6632, pp. 207–223. Springer, Heidelberg (2011)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Catalano, D., Fiore, D., Warinschi, B.: Efficient Network Coding Signatures in the Standard Model. In: Fischlin, M., Buchmann, J., Manulis, M. (eds.) PKC 2012. LNCS, vol. 7293, pp. 680–696. Springer, Heidelberg (2012), http://eprint.iacr.org/2011/696 Google Scholar
  10. 10.
    Charles, D., Jain, K., Lauter, K.: Signatures for network coding. International Journal of Information and Coding Theory 1(1), 3–14 (2009)MathSciNetMATHCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Fischlin, M.: The Cramer-Shoup Strong-RSA Signature Scheme Revisited. In: Desmedt, Y.G. (ed.) PKC 2003. LNCS, vol. 2567, pp. 116–129. Springer, Heidelberg (2002)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Freeman, D.M.: Improved security for linearly homomorphic signatures: A generic framework. Cryptology ePrint Archive, Report 2012/060 (2012), http://eprint.iacr.org/2012/060
  13. 13.
    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)Google Scholar
  14. 14.
    Gennaro, R., Katz, J., Krawczyk, H., Rabin, T.: Secure Network Coding over the Integers. In: Nguyen, P.Q., Pointcheval, D. (eds.) PKC 2010. LNCS, vol. 6056, pp. 142–160. Springer, Heidelberg (2010)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    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
  16. 16.
    Hofheinz, D., Kiltz, E.: Programmable Hash Functions and Their Applications. In: Wagner, D. (ed.) CRYPTO 2008. LNCS, vol. 5157, pp. 21–38. Springer, Heidelberg (2008)Google Scholar
  17. 17.
    Hohenberger, S., Waters, B.: Realizing Hash-and-Sign Signatures under Standard Assumptions. In: Joux, A. (ed.) EUROCRYPT 2009. LNCS, vol. 5479, pp. 333–350. Springer, Heidelberg (2009)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
    Hohenberger, S., Waters, B.: Short and Stateless Signatures from the RSA Assumption. In: Halevi, S. (ed.) CRYPTO 2009. LNCS, vol. 5677, pp. 654–670. Springer, Heidelberg (2009)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. 19.
    Johnson, R., Molnar, D., Song, D., Wagner, D.: Homomorphic Signature Schemes. In: Preneel, B. (ed.) CT-RSA 2002. LNCS, vol. 2271, pp. 244–262. Springer, Heidelberg (2002)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. 20.
    Krawczyk, H., Rabin, T.: Chameleon signatures. In: Network and Distributed System Security Symposium (2000)Google Scholar
  21. 21.
    Krohn, M., Freedman, M., Mazières, D.: On-the-fly verification of rateless erasure codes for efficient content distribution. In: Proc. of IEEE Symposium on Security and Privacy, pp. 226–240 (2004)Google Scholar
  22. 22.
    Lewko, A.B., Waters, B.: New Techniques for Dual System Encryption and Fully Secure HIBE with Short Ciphertexts. In: Micciancio, D. (ed.) TCC 2010. LNCS, vol. 5978, pp. 455–479. Springer, Heidelberg (2010)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. 23.
    Li, S.-Y.R., Yeung, R.W., Cai, N.: Linear network coding. IEEE Trans. Info. Theory 49(2), 371–381 (2003)MathSciNetMATHCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. 24.
    Waters, B.: Efficient Identity-Based Encryption Without Random Oracles. In: Cramer, R. (ed.) EUROCRYPT 2005. LNCS, vol. 3494, pp. 320–329. Springer, Heidelberg (2005)Google Scholar

Copyright information

© International Association for Cryptologic Research 2012

Authors and Affiliations

  • David Mandell Freeman
    • 1
  1. 1.Stanford UniversityUSA

Personalised recommendations