International Association for Cryptologic Research

International Association
for Cryptologic Research


Guilherme Rito

ORCID: 0000-0002-0080-8670


Anamorphic Encryption, Revisited
Anamorphic encryption refers to an enhanced version of an established PKE scheme which can be set up with an additional so-called double key, shared by sender and receiver. This protects against a dictator that can force the receiver to reveal the secret keys for the PKE scheme, but who is oblivious about the existence of the double key. We identify two limitations of the original model by Persiano, Phan, and Yung (EUROCRYPT 2022). First, in their definition a double key can only be generated once, together with a key-pair. This has the drawback that a receiver who wants to use the anamorphic mode after a dictator comes to power, needs to deploy a new key-pair, a potentially suspicious act. Second, a receiver cannot distinguish whether or not a ciphertext contains a covert message. In this work we propose a new model that overcomes these limitations. First, we allow to associate multiple double keys to a key-pair, after its deployment. This also enables deniability in case the double key only depends on the public key. Second, we propose a natural robustness notion, which guarantees that anamorphically decrypting a regularly encrypted message results in a special symbol indicating that no covert message is contained, which also eliminates certain attacks. Finally, to instantiate our new, stronger definition of anamorphic encryption, we provide generic and concrete constructions. Concretely, we show that ElGamal and Cramer-Shoup satisfy a new condition, selective randomness recoverability, which enables robust anamorphic extensions, and we also provide a robust anamorphic extension for RSA-OAEP.
Deniable Authentication when Signing Keys Leak
Deniable Authentication is a highly desirable property for secure messaging protocols: it allows a sender Alice to authentically transmit messages to a designated receiver Bob in such a way that only Bob gets convinced that Alice indeed sent these messages. In particular, it guarantees that even if Bob tries to convince a (non-designated) party Judy that Alice sent some message, and even if Bob gives Judy his own secret key, Judy will not be convinced: as far as Judy knows, _Bob could be making it all up!_ In this paper we study Deniable Authentication in the setting where Judy can additionally obtain Alice's secret key. Informally, we want that knowledge of Alice's secret key does not help Judy in learning whether Alice sent any messages, even if Bob does not have Alice's secret key and even if Bob cooperates with Judy by giving her his own secret key. This stronger flavor of Deniable Authentication was not considered before and is particularly relevant for Off-The-Record Group Messaging as it gives users stronger deniability guarantees. Our main contribution is a scalable "MDRS-PKE" (Multi-Designated Receiver Signed Public Key Encryption) scheme---a technical formalization of Deniable Authentication that is particularly useful for secure messaging for its confidentiality guarantees---that provides this stronger deniability guarantee. At its core lie new MDVS (Multi-Designated Verifier Signature) and PKEBC (Public Key Encryption for Broadcast) scheme constructions: our MDVS is not only secure with respect to the new deniability notions, but it is also the first to be tightly secure under standard assumptions; our PKEBC---which is also of independent interest---is the first with ciphertext sizes and encryption and decryption times that grow only linearly in the number of receivers. This is a significant improvement upon the construction given by Maurer et al. (EUROCRYPT '22), where ciphertext sizes and encryption and decryption times are quadratic in the number of receivers.
Multi-Designated Receiver Signed Public Key Encryption 📺
This paper introduces a new type of public-key encryption scheme, called Multi-Designated Receiver Signed Public Key Encryption (MDRS-PKE), which allows a sender to select a set of designated receivers and both encrypt and sign a message that only these receivers will be able to read and authenticate (confidentiality and authenticity). An MDRS-PKE scheme provides several additional security properties which allow for a fundamentally new type of communication not considered before. Namely, it satisfies consistency---a dishonest sender cannot make different receivers receive different messages---off-the-record---a dishonest receiver cannot convince a third party of what message was sent (e.g., by selling their secret key), because dishonest receivers have the ability to forge signatures---and anonymity---parties that are not in the set of designated receivers cannot identify who the sender and designated receivers are. We give a construction of an MDRS-PKE scheme from standard assumptions. At the core of our construction lies yet another new type of public-key encryption scheme, which is of independent interest: Public Key Encryption for Broadcast (PKEBC) which provides all the security guarantees of MDRS-PKE schemes, except authenticity. We note that MDRS-PKE schemes give strictly more guarantees than Multi-Designated Verifier Signature (MDVS) schemes with privacy of identities. This in particular means that our MDRS-PKE construction yields the first MDVS scheme with privacy of identities from standard assumptions. The only prior construction of such schemes was based on Verifiable Functional Encryption for general circuits (Damgard et al., TCC '20).
Practical Provably Secure Flooding for Blockchains 📺
In recent years, permisionless blockchains have received a lot of attention both from industry and academia, where substantial effort has been spent to develop consensus protocols that are secure under the assumption that less than half (or a third) of a given resource (e.g., stake or computing power) is controlled by corrupted parties. The security proofs of these consensus protocols usually assume the availability of a network functionality guaranteeing that a block sent by an honest party is received by all honest parties within some bounded time. To obtain an overall protocol that is secure under the same corruption assumption, it is therefore necessary to combine the consensus protocol with a network protocol that achieves this property under that assumption. In practice, however, the underlying network is typically implemented by flooding protocols that are not proven to be secure in the setting where a fraction of the considered total weight can be corrupted. This has led to many so-called eclipse attacks on existing protocols and tailor-made fixes against specific attacks. To close this apparent gap, we present the first practical flooding protocol that provably delivers sent messages to all honest parties after a logarithmic number of steps. We prove security in the setting where all parties are publicly assigned a positive weight and the adversary can corrupt parties accumulating up to a constant fraction of the total weight. This can directly be used in the proof-of-stake setting, but is not limited to it. To prove the security of our protocol, we combine known results about the diameter of Erdős–Rényi graphs with reductions between different types of random graphs. We further show that the efficiency of our protocol is asymptotically optimal. The practicality of our protocol is supported by extensive simulations for different numbers of parties, weight distributions, and corruption strategies. The simulations confirm our theoretical results and show that messages are delivered quickly regardless of the weight distribution, whereas protocols that are oblivious of the parties' weights completely fail if the weights are unevenly distributed. Furthermore, the average message complexity per party of our protocol is within a small constant factor of such a protocol.
Revisiting (R)CCA Security and Replay Protection 📺
This paper takes a fresh approach to systematically characterizing, comparing, and understanding CCA-type security definitions for public-key encryption (PKE), a topic with a long history. The justification for a concrete security definition X is relative to a benchmark application (e.g. confidential communication): Does the use of a PKE scheme satisfying X imply the security of the application? Because unnecessarily strong definitions may lead to unnecessarily inefficient schemes or unnecessarily strong computational assumptions, security definitions should be as weak as possible, i.e. as close as possible to (but above) the benchmark. Understanding the hierarchy of security definitions, partially ordered by the implication (i.e. at least as strong) relation, is hence important, as is placing the relevant applications as benchmark levels within the hierarchy. CCA-2 security is apparently the strongest notion, but because it is arguably too strong, Canetti, Krawczyk, and Nielsen (Crypto 2003) proposed the relaxed notions of Replayable CCA security (RCCA) as perhaps the weakest meaningful definition, and they investigated the space between CCA and RCCA security by proposing two versions of Detectable RCCA (d-RCCA) security which are meant to ensure that replays of ciphertexts are either publicly or secretly detectable (and hence preventable). The contributions of this paper are three-fold. First, following the work of Coretti, Maurer, and Tackmann (Asiacrypt 2013), we formalize the three benchmark applications of PKE that serve as the natural motivation for security notions, namely the construction of certain types of (possibly replay-protected) confidential channels (from an insecure and an authenticated communication channel). Second, we prove that RCCA does not achieve the confidentiality benchmark and, contrary to previous belief, that the proposed d-RCCA notions are not even relaxations of CCA-2 security. Third, we propose the natural security notions corresponding to the three benchmarks: an appropriately strengthened version of RCCA to ensure confidentiality, as well as two notions for capturing public and secret replay detectability.
Giving an Adversary Guarantees (Or: How to Model Designated Verifier Signatures in a Composable Framework) 📺
When defining a security notion, one typically specifies what dishonest parties cannot achieve. For example, communication is confidential if a third party cannot learn anything about the messages being transmitted, and it is authentic if a third party cannot impersonate the real (honest) sender. For certain applications, however, security crucially relies on giving dishonest parties certain capabilities. As an example, in Designated Verifier Signature (DVS) schemes, one captures that only the designated verifier can be convinced of the authenticity of a message by guaranteeing that any dishonest party can forge signatures which look indistinguishable (to a third party) from original ones created by the sender. However, composable frameworks cannot typically model such guarantees as they are only designed to bound what a dishonest party can do. In this paper we show how to model such guarantees---that dishonest parties must have some capability---in the Constructive Cryptography (CC) framework (Maurer and Renner, ICS 2011). More concretely, we give the first composable security definitions for Multi-Designated Verifier Signature (MDVS) schemes---a generalization of DVS schemes. The ideal world is defined as the intersection of two worlds. The first captures authenticity in the usual way. The second provides the guarantee that a dishonest party can forge signatures. By taking the intersection we have an ideal world with the desired properties. We also compare our composable definitions to existing security notions for MDVS schemes from the literature. We find that only recently, 23 years after the introduction of MDVS schemes, sufficiently strong security notions were introduced capturing the security of MDVS schemes (Damg{\r a}rd et al., TCC 2020). As we prove, however, these notions are still strictly stronger than necessary.