Public-Key Cryptosystems Based on Composite Degree Residuosity Classes Author: Pascal Paillier Presenter: 陳國璋 [Published in J. Stern, Ed., Advances in Cryptology- EUROCRYPT'99, vol of Lecture Notes in Computer Science, pp , Springer-Verlag, 1999.]
Outline Introduction Notation and math. assumption Scheme 1 Scheme 2 Scheme 3 Properties Conclusion
Introduction(1/2) 兩個主要的 Trapdoor 技術 RSA Diffie-Hellman 提出新的技術 Composite Residuosity 提出新的計算性問題 Composite Residuosity Class Problem
Introduction(2/2) 提出 3 個架構在上述假設的同態加密機制 (Homomophic encryption schemes), 之中包含一個新的 trapdoor permutation 滿足 semantically secure, 不過, 作者沒 有證明.
Outline Background Notation and math. assumption Scheme 1 Scheme 2 Scheme 3 Properties Conclusion
Notation and math. assumption (1/10) p, q are two large primes. n = pq Euler phi-function: ψ(n) = (p-1)(q-1) Carmichael function: λ(n) = lcm(p-1,q-1) |Z n 2 *| = ψ(n 2 ) = nψ(n) Any w ∈ Z n 2 *, w λ = 1 mod n w nλ = 1 mod n
Notation and math. assumption (2/10) RSA[n,e] problem Extracting e-th roots modulo n where n=pq Relation P 1 P 2 (resp. P 1 ≡ P 2 ) will denoted that problem P 1 is polynomial reducible to the problem P 2. n-th residue modulo n 2 A number z is th n-th residue modulo n 2 if there exist a number y such that z=y n mod n 2
Notation and math. assumption (3/10) CR[n] problem deciding n-th residuosity The CR[n] problem of deciding quadratic or higher degree residuosity, it is a random-self-reducibility problem. There exists no polynomial time distinguisher for n-th residues modulo n 2, i.e. CR[n] is intractable.
Notation and math. assumption (4/10)
Notation and math. assumption (5/10) if order(g) = kn where k is nonzero multiple of n then ε g is bijective. Domain and Co-domain are the same order nψ(n) and the function is 1-to-1.
Notation and math. assumption (6/10)
Notation and math. assumption (7/10) Class[n,g] problem computing the class function in base g. given w ∈ Z n 2 *, compute [w] g random-self-reducible problem the bases g are independent
Notation and math. assumption (8/10) Class[n] problem composite residuosity class problem given w ∈ Z n 2 *, g ∈ B, compute [w] g Class[n] Fact[n]
Notation and math. assumption (9/10)
Notation and math. assumption (10/10) Class[n] RSA[n,n] D-Class[n] problem decisional Class[n] problem given w ∈ Z n 2 *,g ∈ B, x ∈ Z n, decide whether x=[w] g or not
Outline Background Notation and math. assumption Scheme 1 Scheme 2 Scheme 3 Properties Conclusion
Scheme 1(1/6) New probabilistic encryption scheme
Scheme 1 (2/6)
Scheme 1 (3/6) One-way function Given x, to compute f(x) = y is easy. Given y, to find x s.t. f(x) = y is hard. One-way trapdoor f() is a one-way function. Given a secret s, given y, to find x s.t. f(x) = y is easy. Trapdoor permutation f() is a one-way trapdoor. f() is bijective.
Scheme 1 (4/6)
Scheme 1 (5/6) Scheme 1 is one-way ⇔ the Computational composite residuosity assumption(Class[n] problem) holds. Inverting our scheme is by the definition the composite residuosity class problem.
Scheme 1 (6/6) Scheme 1 is semantically secure ⇔ the Decisional composite residuosity assumption(CR[n] problem) holds. m 0, m 1 : known messages. c:ciphertext of either m 0 or m 1. [w] g =0 iff w is the n-th residue modulo n 2. c=ε g (m 0,r) iff cg -m 0 mod n 2 is the n-th residue modulo n 2. Vice-versa.
Outline Background Notation and math. assumption Scheme 1 Scheme 2 Scheme 3 Properties Conclusion
Scheme 2(1/5) New one-way trapdoor permutation
Scheme 2(2/5)
Scheme 2(3/5)
Scheme 2(4/5)
Scheme 2(5/5) Digital Signatures
Outline Background Notation and math. assumption Scheme 1 Scheme 2 Scheme 3 Properties Conclusion
Scheme 3(1/4) Cost down for decryption complexity. Restricting the ciphertext space Z n 2 * to subgroup of smaller order.
Scheme 3(2/4)
Scheme 3(3/4) PDL[n,g] problem Partial discrete logarithm problem Given w ∈, compute [w] g D-PDL[n,g] problem Decisional partial discrete logarithm problem Given w ∈, x ∈ Z n, decide whether [w] g =x.
Scheme 3(4/4) Scheme 3 is one-way ⇔ PDL[n,g] is hard. Scheme 3 is semantically secure ⇔ D-PDL[n,g] is hard.
Outline Background Notation and math. assumption Scheme 1 Scheme 2 Scheme 3 Properties Conclusion
Properties(1/3) Random-Self-Reducibility A good algorithm for the average case implies a good algorithm for the worst case.
Properties(2/3) Additive Homomorphic Properties
Properties(3/3) Self-Blinding Any ciphertext can be publicly changed into another one without affecting the plaintext.
Outline Background Notation and math. assumption Scheme 1 Scheme 2 Scheme 3 Properties Conclusion
Conclusion(1/4) SchemeMainPermutationFast Variant RSAElGamal One- wayness Class[n]RSA[n,n]PDL[n,g]RSA[n,F 4 ]DH[p] Semantic Secure CR[n]noneD-PDL[n,g]noneDDH[p] Plaintext size |n|2|n||n| |p| Ciphertext size 2|n| |n|2|p|
EncMainPermutat ion Fast Variant RSAElGamal |n|,|p|= |n|,|p|= |n|,|p|= |n|,|p|= |n|,|p|=
DecMainPermutat ion Fast Variant RSAElGamal |n|,|p|= |n|,|p|= |n|,|p|= |n|,|p|= |n|,|p|=
Conclusion(4/4) 提出新的數論問題 Class[n] 基於 composite degree residues 的 trapdoor 的機制 雖然並沒有提出任何證明作者的 scheme 能 抵抗 CCA ,但作者相信小小的修改 Scheme 1 與 3 就可以對抗 CCA ,並能透過 random oracle 來證明