International Association for Cryptologic Research

International Association
for Cryptologic Research

CryptoDB

Mohammad Mahmoody

Publications

Year
Venue
Title
2022
CRYPTO
On the Impossibility of Key Agreements from Quantum Random Oracles
We study the following question, first publicly posed by Hosoyamada and Yamakawa in 2018. Can parties A, B with local quantum computing power rely (only) on a random oracle and classical communication to agree on a key? (Note that A, B can now query the random oracle at quantum superpositions.) We make the first progress on the question above and prove the following. – When only one of the parties A is classical and the other party B is quantum powered, as long as they ask a total of d oracle queries and agree on a key with probability 1, then there is always a way to break the key agreement by asking O(d^2) number of classical oracle queries. – When both parties can make quantum queries to the random oracle, we introduce a natural conjecture, which if true would imply attacks with poly(d) classical queries to the random oracle. Our conjecture, roughly speaking, states that the multiplication of any two degree-d real-valued polynomials over the Boolean hypercube of influence at most δ = 1/ poly(d) is nonzero. We then prove our conjecture for exponentially small influences, which leads to an (unconditional) classical 2^O(md)-query attack on any such key agreement protocol, where m is the random oracle’s output length. – Since our attacks are classical, we then ask whether it is possible to find such classical attacks in general. We prove a barrier for this approach, by showing that if the folklore “simulation conjecture” about the possibility of simulating efficient-query quantum algorithms classically is false, then that implies a possible quantum protocol that cannot be broken by classical adversaries.
2021
TCC
Polynomial-time targeted attacks on coin-tossing for any number of corruptions 📺
Consider a coin tossing protocol in which n processors P_1,...,P_n agree on a random bit b in n rounds, where in round i P_i sends a single message w_i. Imagine a full-information adversary who prefers the output 1, and in every round i it knows all the finalized messages w_1,...,w_{i-1} so far as well as the prepared message w_i. A k-replacing attack will have a chance to replace the prepared w_i with its own choice w'_i \neq w_i in up to k rounds. Taking majority protocol over uniformly random bits w_i = b_i is robust in the following strong sense. Any k-replacing adversary can only increase the probability of outputting 1 by at most O(k/\sqrt{n}). In this work, we ask if the above simple protocol is tight. For the same setting, but restricted to uniformly random bit messages, Lichtenstein, Linial, and Saks [Combinatorica'89] showed how to achieve bias \Omega(k/\sqrt{n}) for any k \in [n]. Kalai, Komargodski, and Raz [DISC'18, Combinatorica'21] gave an alternative polynomial-time attack when k \geq \Theta(\sqrt{n}). Etesami, Mahloujifar, and Mahmoody [ALT'19, SODA'20] extended the result of KKR18 to arbitrary long messages. In this work, we resolve both of these problems. - For arbitrary length messages, we show that k-replacing polynomial-time attacks can indeed increase the probability of outputting 1 by \Omega(k/\sqrt{n}) for any k, which is optimal up to a constant factor. By plugging in our attack into the framework of Mahloujifar Mahmoody [TCC'17] we obtain similar data poisoning attacks against deterministic learners when adversary is limited to changing k=o(\sqrt{n}) of the n training examples. - For uniformly random bits b_1,...,b_n, we show that whenever Pr[b=1]=Pr[\sum b_i \geq t]=\beta[t]_n for t \in [n] is the probability of a Hamming ball, then online polynomial-time k-replacing attacks can increase Pr[b=1] from \beta[t]_n to \beta[t-k]_n , which is optimal due to the majority protocol. In comparison, the (information-theoretic) attack of LLS89 increased Pr[b=1] to \beta[t-k]_{n-k}, which is optimal for adaptive adversaries who cannot see the message before changing it. Thus, we obtain a computational variant of Harper's celebrated vertex isoperimetric inequality.
2019
PKC
Registration-Based Encryption from Standard Assumptions
The notion of Registration-Based Encryption (RBE) was recently introduced by Garg, Hajiabadi, Mahmoody, and Rahimi [TCC’18] with the goal of removing the private-key generator (PKG) from IBE. Specifically, RBE allows encrypting to identities using a (compact) master public key, like how IBE is used, with the benefit that the PKG is substituted with a weaker entity called “key curator” who has no knowledge of any secret keys. Here individuals generate their secret keys on their own and then publicly register their identities and their corresponding public keys to the key curator. Finally, individuals obtain “rare” decryption-key updates from the key curator as the population grows. In their work, they gave a construction of RBE schemes based on the combination of indistinguishability obfuscation and somewhere statistically binding hash functions. However, they left open the problem of constructing RBE schemes based on standard assumptions.In this work, we resolve the above problem and construct RBE schemes based on standard assumptions (e.g., CDH or LWE). Furthermore, we show a new application of RBE in a novel context. In particular, we show that anonymous variants of RBE (which we also construct under standard assumptions) can be used for realizing abstracts forms of anonymous messaging tasks in simple scenarios in which the parties communicate by writing messages on a shared board in a synchronized way.
2018
CRYPTO
Limits on the Power of Garbling Techniques for Public-Key Encryption 📺
Understanding whether public-key encryption can be based on one-way functions is a fundamental open problem in cryptography. The seminal work of Impagliazzo and Rudich [STOC’89] shows that black-box constructions of public-key encryption from one-way functions are impossible. However, this impossibility result leaves open the possibility of using non-black-box techniques for achieving this goal.One of the most powerful classes of non-black-box techniques, which can be based on one-way functions (OWFs) alone, is Yao’s garbled circuit technique [FOCS’86]. As for the non-black-box power of this technique, the recent work of Döttling and Garg [CRYPTO’17] shows that the use of garbling allows us to circumvent known black-box barriers in the context of identity-based encryption.We prove that garbling of circuits that have OWF (or even random oracle) gates in them are insufficient for obtaining public-key encryption. Additionally, we show that this model also captures (non-interactive) zero-knowledge proofs for relations with OWF gates. This indicates that currently known OWF-based non-black-box techniques are perhaps insufficient for realizing public-key encryption.
2018
CRYPTO
On the Round Complexity of OT Extension 📺
We show that any OT extension protocol based on one-way functions (or more generally any symmetric-key primitive) either requires an additional round compared to the base OTs or must make a non-black-box use of one-way functions. This result also holds in the semi-honest setting or in the case of certain setup models such as the common random string model. This implies that OT extension in any secure computation protocol must come at the price of an additional round of communication or the non-black-box use of symmetric key primitives. Moreover, we observe that our result is tight in the sense that positive results can indeed be obtained using non-black-box techniques or at the cost of one additional round of communication.
2018
TCC
Registration-Based Encryption: Removing Private-Key Generator from IBE
In this work, we introduce the notion of registration-based encryption (RBE for short) with the goal of removing the trust parties need to place in the private-key generator in an IBE scheme. In an RBE scheme, users sample their own public and secret keys. There will also be a “key curator” whose job is only to aggregate the public keys of all the registered users and update the “short” public parameter whenever a new user joins the system. Encryption can still be performed to a particular recipient using the recipient’s identity and any public parameters released subsequent to the recipient’s registration. Decryption requires some auxiliary information connecting users’ public (and secret) keys to the public parameters. Because of this, as the public parameters get updated, a decryptor may need to obtain “a few” additional auxiliary information for decryption. More formally, if n is the total number of identities and $$\mathrm {\kappa }$$κ is the security parameter, we require the following.Efficiency requirements: (1) A decryptor only needs to obtain updated auxiliary information for decryption at most $$O(\log n)$$O(logn) times in its lifetime, (2) each of these updates are computed by the key curator in time $${\text {poly}}(\mathrm {\kappa },\log n)$$poly(κ,logn), and (3) the key curator updates the public parameter upon the registration of a new party in time $${\text {poly}}(\mathrm {\kappa },\log n)$$poly(κ,logn). Properties (2) and (3) require the key curator to have random access to its data.Compactness requirements: (1) Public parameters are always at most $${\text {poly}}(\mathrm {\kappa },\log n)$$poly(κ,logn) bit, and (2) the total size of updates a user ever needs for decryption is also at most $${\text {poly}}(\mathrm {\kappa },\log n)$$poly(κ,logn) bits.We present feasibility results for constructions of RBE based on indistinguishably obfuscation. We further provide constructions of weakly efficient RBE, in which the registration step is done in $${\text {poly}}(\mathrm {\kappa },n)$$poly(κ,n), based on CDH, Factoring or LWE assumptions. Note that registration is done only once per identity, and the more frequent operation of generating updates for a user, which can happen more times, still runs in time $${\text {poly}}(\mathrm {\kappa },\log n)$$poly(κ,logn). We leave open the problem of obtaining standard RBE (with $${\text {poly}}(\mathrm {\kappa },\log n)$$poly(κ,logn) registration time) from standard assumptions.
2017
CRYPTO
2017
TCC
2017
TCC
2016
EUROCRYPT
2016
TCC
2016
TCC
2014
CRYPTO
2014
TCC
2014
TCC
2013
TCC
2012
TCC
2012
TCC
2012
CRYPTO
2011
TCC
2011
CRYPTO
2010
CRYPTO
2009
CRYPTO

Program Committees

Crypto 2022
Crypto 2020
TCC 2020
Eurocrypt 2019
TCC 2019
Eurocrypt 2018
TCC 2015
TCC 2014
TCC 2013
TCC 2011