One of the central questions in Cryptography is to design round-efficient protocols that are secure under man-in-the-middle attacks. In this paper we introduce and study the notion of non-malleable witness indistinguishability (NMWI) and examine its relation with the classic notion of non-malleable zero knowledge (NMZK). Indeed, despite tremendous applicability of witness indistinguishability, while a lot of attention has been given to NMZK, very little attention has been given to witness indistinguishability in case of man-in-the-middle attacks. We initiate this study, with several (perhaps somewhat surprising) results: • We give the first definition of NMWI proof systems. Just like every NMZK proof is a zero-knowledge proof which aims to attain a very strong proof independence property, we require (and formalize) the notion that every NMWI proof is a witness indistinguishable proof system which enjoys a very strong witness independence property against any man-in-the-middle attack. • We show the existence of a constant-round NMWI argument system for NP in the standard model (i.e. without any trusted or any other setup assumptions).
One of the central questions in Cryptography is to design round-efficient protocols that are secure under man-in-the-middle attacks. In this paper we introduce and study the notion of non-malleable witness indistinguishability (NMWI) and examine its relation with the classic notion of non-malleable zero knowledge (NMZK). Indeed, despite tremendous applicability of witness indistinguishability, while a lot of attention has been given to NMZK, very little attention has been given to witness indistinguishability in case of man-in-the-middle attacks. We initiate this study, with several (perhaps somewhat surprising) results: • We give the first definition of NMWI proof systems. Just like every NMZK proof is a zero-knowledge proof which aims to attain a very strong proof independence property, we require (and formalize) the notion that every NMWI proof is a witness indistinguishable proof system which enjoys a very strong witness independence property against any man-in-the-middle attack. • We show the existence of a constant-round NMWI argument system for NP in the standard model (i.e. without any trusted or any other setup assumptions).
One of the central questions in Cryptography today is proving security of the protocols "on the Internet", i.e., in a concurrent setting where there are multiple interactions between players, and where the adversary can play so called "man-in-the-middle" attacks, forwarding and modifying messages between two or more unsuspecting players. Indeed, the main challenge in this setting is to provide security with respect to adaptive concurrent composition of protocols and also the non-malleability property, where the "man-in-the-middle" attacks are prevented. Despite much research effort, we do not know how to implement many basic tasks in this setting (which features concurrent composition and man-in-the-middle attacks). Indeed, even
We consider a type of zero-knowledge protocols that are of interest for their practical applications within networks like the Internet: efficient zero-knowledge arguments of knowledge that remain secure against concurrent man-in-the-middle attacks. In an effort to reduce the setup assumptions required for efficient zero-knowledge arguments of knowledge that remain secure against concurrent man-in-the-middle attacks, we consider a model, which we call the Authenticated Public-Key (APK) model. The APK model seems to significantly reduce the setup assumptions made by the CRS model (as no trusted party or honest execution of a centralized algorithm are required), and can be seen as a slightly stronger variation of the Bare Public-Key (BPK) model from \cite{CGGM,MR}, and a weaker variation of the registered public-key model used in \cite{BCNP}. We then define and study man-in-the-middle attacks in the APK model. Our main result is a constant-round concurrent non-malleable zero-knowledge argument of knowledge for any polynomial-time relation (associated to a language in NP), under the (minimal) assumption of the existence of a one-way function family. Furthermore,We show time-efficient instantiations of our protocol based on known number-theoretic assumptions. We also note a negative result with respect to further reducing the setup assumptions of our protocol to those in the (unauthenticated) BPK model, by showing that concurrently non-malleable zero-knowledge arguments of knowledge in the BPK model are only possible for trivial languages.
We present the first constant-round non-malleable commitment scheme and the first constant-round non-malleable zero-knowledge argument system, as defined by Dolev, Dwork and Naor (1991). Previous constructions either used a non-constant number of rounds, or were only secure under stronger setup assumptions. An example of such an assumption is the shared random string model where we assume all parties have access to a reference string that was chosen uniformly at random by a trusted dealer. We obtain these results by defining an adequate notion of non-malleable coin-tossing, and presenting a constant-round protocol that satisfies it. This protocol allows us to transform protocols that are non-malleable in (a modified notion of) the shared random string model into protocols that are non-malleable in the plain model (without any trusted dealer or setup assumptions). Observing that known constructions of a non-interactive non-malleable zero-knowledge argument systems in the shared random string model (De Santis et. al., 2001) are in fact non-malleable in the modified model, and combining them with our coin-tossing protocol we obtain the results mentioned above. The techniques we use are different from those used in previous constructions of non-malleable protocols. In particular our protocol uses diagonalization and a non-black-box proof of security (in a sense similar to Barak's zero-knowledge argument (2001)).
Concurrent non-malleable zero-knowledge ( CNMZK ) considers the concurrent execution of zero-knowledge protocols in a setting even when adversaries can simultaneously corrupt multiple provers and verifiers. As far as we know, the round complexity of all the constructions of CNMZK arguments for NP is at least ω (log n ). In this paper, we provide the first construction of a constant-round concurrent non-malleable zero-knowledge argument for every language in NP . Our protocol relies on the existence of families of collision-resistant hash functions , one-way permutations and indistinguishability obfuscators . As an additional contribution, we study the composition of two central notions in zero knowledge, the simultaneously resettable zero-knowledge and non-malleable zero-knowledge , which seemingly have stronger proved security guarantees. We give the first construction of a constant-round simultaneously-resettable non-malleable zero-knowledge . To the best of our knowledge, this is the first study to combine the two security concepts described above together in the zero-knowledge protocols.
This paper focuses on the robustness of concurrent non-malleable zero-knowledge.Existing concurrent non-malleable zero-knowledge protocols either apply non-black-box techniques,or employ black-box but incorporate a zero-knowledge sub-protocol.Hence when concurrently composed with other protocols,security of these protocols is not preserved or hard to argue.Following the well-known Feige-Shamir style,this paper presents a new construction for concurrent non-malleable zero-knowledge argument system,which is easily composed.This protocol takes the robust non-malleable commitment scheme introduced by Lin and Pass in STOC 2009 and specially designed witness indistinguishable proofs as basic components to achieve non-malleability and robustness.Moreover,this paper applies the oblivious simulation strategy to simulate the view of the adversary,and the proof technique introduced by Lin et al.in Crypto 2010 to analyze the indistinguishability of simulation.Since witness indistinguishability is closed under concurrent composition,the commitment sub-protocol is robust and the is oblivious,when concurrently composed with other protocols,this protocol is easier to work with and analyze.Based on the one-way function assumption,the round complexity of this protocol is super-logarithmic.
Non-malleable commitments are a fundamental cryptographic tool for preventing (concurrent) man-in-the-middle attacks. Since their invention by Dolev, Dwork, and Naor in 1991, their round-complexity has been extensively studied, leading up to constant-round protocols based on one-way functions (OWFs), and three-round protocols based on sub-exponential OWFs, and standard polynomial-time hardness assumptions such as decisional Diffie--Hellman (DDH) and ZAPs (i.e., two-round witness-indistinguishable proofs). But constructions of two-round, or non-interactive, non-malleable commitments have so far remained elusive; the only known construction relied on a strong and non-falsifiable assumption with a non-malleability flavor. Additionally, a recent result by Pass shows the impossibility of basing two-round non-malleable commitments on falsifiable assumptions using a polynomial-time black-box security reduction. In this work, we show how to overcome this impossibility using super-polynomial-time hardness assumptions. Our main result demonstrates the existence of two-round concurrent non-malleable commitments based on the following four primitives (all with sub-exponential security): (1) non-interactive commitments, (2) ZAPs (i.e., 2-round witness indistinguishable proofs), (3) collision-resistant hash functions, and (4) a “weak” time-lock puzzle. Primitives (1), (2), and (3) can be based on, e.g., the discrete log and the RSA assumption. Time-lock puzzles---puzzles that can be solved by “brute-force” in time 2t, but cannot be solved significantly faster even using parallel computers---were proposed by Rivest, Shamir, and Wagner in 1996 and have been extensively studied since. We additionally obtain a non-interactive (i.e., one-message) version of our protocol satisfying concurrent non-malleability w.r.t. uniform attackers and show that our non-malleable commitments satisfy an even stronger notion of chosen commitment attack security.