Extended Security Arguments for Signature Schemes

  • Sidi Mohamed El Yousfi Alaoui
  • Özgür Dagdelen
  • Pascal Véron
  • David Galindo
  • Pierre-Louis Cayrel
Conference paper

DOI: 10.1007/978-3-642-31410-0_2

Part of the Lecture Notes in Computer Science book series (LNCS, volume 7374)
Cite this paper as:
El Yousfi Alaoui S.M., Dagdelen Ö., Véron P., Galindo D., Cayrel PL. (2012) Extended Security Arguments for Signature Schemes. In: Mitrokotsa A., Vaudenay S. (eds) Progress in Cryptology - AFRICACRYPT 2012. AFRICACRYPT 2012. Lecture Notes in Computer Science, vol 7374. Springer, Berlin, Heidelberg

Abstract

The well-known forking lemma by Pointcheval and Stern has been used to prove the security of the so-called generic signature schemes. These signature schemes are obtained via the Fiat-Shamir transform from three-pass identification schemes. A number of five-pass identification protocols have been proposed in the last few years. Extending the forking lemma and the Fiat-Shamir transform would allow to obtain new signature schemes since, unfortunately, these newly proposed schemes fall outside the original framework. In this paper, we provide an extension of the forking lemma in order to assess the security of what we call n-generic signature schemes. These include signature schemes that are derived from certain (2n + 1)-pass identification schemes. We thus obtain a generic methodology for proving the security of a number of signature schemes derived from recently published five-pass identification protocols, and potentially for (2n + 1)-pass identification schemes to come.

Keywords

signature schemes forking lemma identification schemes 

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg 2012

Authors and Affiliations

  • Sidi Mohamed El Yousfi Alaoui
    • 1
  • Özgür Dagdelen
    • 1
  • Pascal Véron
    • 2
  • David Galindo
    • 3
  • Pierre-Louis Cayrel
    • 4
  1. 1.Darmstadt University of TechnologyGermany
  2. 2.IML/IMATH Université du Sud Toulon-VarFrance
  3. 3.University of LuxembourgLuxembourg
  4. 4.Laboratoire Hubert Curien Université de Saint-EtienneFrance

Personalised recommendations