Key exchange with unilateral authentication (short: unilateral key exchange) is an important primitive in practical security protocols; a prime example is the widely deployed TLS protocol, which is usually run in this mode. Unilateral key-exchange protocols are employed in a clientserver setting where only the server has a certified public key. The client is then authenticated by sending credentials via a connection that is secured with the key obtained from the protocol. Somewhat surprisingly and despite its importance in practical scenarios, this type of key exchange has received relatively little attention in the cryptographic literature compared to the type with mutual authentication. In this work, we follow the constructive cryptography paradigm of Maurer and Renner (ICS 2011) to obtain a (composable) security definition for key-exchange protocols with unilateral authentication: We describe a “unilateral key ” resource and require from a key-exchange protocol that it constructs this resource in a scenario where only the server is authenticated. One main advantage of this approach is that it comes with strong composition guarantees: Any higher-level protocol proven secure with respect to the unilateral key resource remains secure if the key is obtained
Key exchange with unilateral authentication (short: unilateral key exchange) is an important primitive in practical security protocols; a prime example is the widely deployed TLS protocol, which is usually run in this mode. Unilateral key-exchange protocols are employed in a clientserver setting where only the server has a certified public key. The client is then authenticated by sending credentials via a connection that is secured with the key obtained from the protocol. Somewhat surprisingly and despite its importance in practical scenarios, this type of key exchange has received relatively little attention in the cryptographic literature compared to the type with mutual authentication. In this work, we follow the constructive cryptography paradigm of Maurer and Renner (ICS 2011) to obtain a (composable) security definition for key-exchange protocols with unilateral authentication: We describe a “unilateral key ” resource and require from a key-exchange protocol that it constructs this resource in a scenario where only the server is authenticated. One main advantage of this approach is that it comes with strong composition guarantees: Any higher-level protocol proven secure with respect to the unilateral key resource remains secure if the key is obtained
Key exchange protocols, first introduced by Diffie and Hellman in 1976, are one of the most widely-deployed cryptographic protocols. They allow two parties, that have never interacted before, to establish shared secrets. These shared cryptographic keys may subsequently be used to establish a secure communication channel. Use cases include the classic client-server setting that is for example at play when browsing the internet, but also chats via end-to-end-encrypted instant messaging applications. Security-wise, we generally demand of key exchange protocols to achieve key secrecy and authentication. While, informally, authentication ensures that the communicating parties have confidence in the identity of their peers, key secrecy ensures that any shared cryptographic key that is established via the key exchange protocol is only known to the participants in the protocol and can be used securely in cryptographic protocols, i.e., is sufficiently random. In 1993, Bellare and Rogaway gave a first formalization of key exchange protocol security that captures these properties with respect to powerful adversaries with full control over the network. Their model constitutes the basis of the many subsequent treatments of authenticated key exchange security, including the models presented in this thesis. The common methodological approach underlying all of these formalizations is the provable security paradigm, which has become a standard tool in assessing the security of cryptographic protocols and primitives. So-called security models specify the expected security guarantees of the scheme in question with regards to a well-defined class of adversaries. Proofs that validate these security claims do so by reducing the security of the overall scheme to the security of the underlying cryptographic primitives and hardness assumptions. However, advances in computational power and more sophisticated cryptanalytic capabilities often render exactly these components insecure. Especially the advent of quantum computers will have a devastating effect on much of today's public key cryptography. This is especially true for key exchange protocols since they rely crucially on public-key algorithms. In this thesis, our focus in future-proofing key exchange protocols is two-fold. First, we focus on extending security models for key exchange protocols to capture the (un)expected break of cryptographic primitives and hardness assumptions. The aim is to gain assurances with respect to future adversaries and to investigate the effects of primitive failures on key exchange protocols. More specifically, we explore how key exchange protocols can be safely transitioned to new, post-quantum secure algorithms with hybrid techniques. Hybrids combine classical and post-quantum algorithms such that the overall key agreement scheme remains secure as long as one of the two base schemes remains secure. For this, we introduce security notions for key encapsulation mechanisms that account for adversaries with varying levels of quantum capabilities and present three new constructions for hybrid key encapsulation mechanisms. Our hybrid designs are practice-inspired and for example capture draft proposals for hybrid modes in the Transport Layer Security (TLS) protocol, which is one of the most widely-deployed cryptographic protocols that enables key agreement. Furthermore, our notion of breakdown resilience for key exchange protocols allows to gauge the security of past session keys in the event of a failure of a cryptographic component in the key exchange. We exercise our model on variants of the post-quantum secure key exchange protocol NewHope by Alkim et al. Thereby, we confirm the intuition that, in order to guard against adversaries that only have access to quantum computing power in the (more distant) future, it is sufficient to use classically-secure authentication mechanisms alongside post-quantum key agreement to achieve authenticated key exchange. As with any mathematical statement, theorems in the provable security paradigm are only as valid as the underlying assumptions. A careful consideration of any newly made assumption is thus essential to ensure the meaningfulness of the statement itself and make the assumption a viable tool for future analyses. Thus, secondly, we systematically classify the PRF-ODH assumption, a complexity-theoretic hardness assumption that has been used in key exchange security analyses of such prominent protocols as TLS, Signal, and Wireguard. In particular, we give a unified, parametrized definition of the assumption encompassing different variants that are present in the literature. We relate the resulting parametrized notions in terms of their strength and show where these assumptions fit in the collection of well-understood related hardness assumptions. We finally sketch our result on the impossibility of instantiating this assumption in the standard model, thereby disposing of the uncertainty in the community whether PRF-ODH is in fact a standard model assumption, i.e., removes the usage of some idealized assumptions in key exchange protocol proofs.
Message authentication and key exchange are two of the most basic tasks of cryptography. Solutions based on public-key infrastructure (PKI) are prevalent. Still, the state of the art in composable security analysis of PKI-based authentication and key exchange is somewhat unsatisfactory. Specifically, existing treatments either (a) make the unrealistic assumption that the PKI is accessible only within the confines of the protocol itself, thus failing to capture real-world PKI-based authentication, or (b) impose oftenunnecessary requirements—such as strong on-line non-transferability—on candidate protocols, thus ruling out natural candidates. We give a modular and universally composable analytical framework for PKI-based message authentication and key exchange protocols. This framework guarantees security even when the PKI is pre-existing and globally available, without being unnecessarily restrictive. Specifically, we model PKI as a global set-up functionality within the Global UC security model [Canetti et al., TCC 2007] and relax the ideal authentication and key exchange functionalities accordingly. We then demonstrate the security of basic signature-based authentication and key exchange protocols. Our modeling makes minimal security assumptions on the PKI in use; in particular, “knowledge of the secret key” is not needed.
We propose a novel paradigm for defining security of cryptographic protocols, called universally composable security. The salient property of universally composable definitions of security is that they guarantee security even when a secure protocol is composed of an arbitrary set of protocols, or more generally when the protocol is used as a component of an arbitrary system. This is an essential property for maintaining security of cryptographic protocols in complex and unpredictable environments such as the Internet. In particular, universally composable definitions guarantee security even when an unbounded number of protocol instances are executed concurrently in an adversarially controlled manner, they guarantee non-malleability with respect to arbitrary protocols, and more. We show how to formulate universally composable definitions of security for practically any cryptographic task. Furthermore, we demonstrate that practically any such definition can be realized using known techniques, as long as only a minority of the participants are corrupted. We then proceed to formulate universally composable definitions of a wide array of cryptographic tasks, including authenticated and secure communication, key-exchange, public-key encryption, signature, commitment, oblivious transfer, zero knowledge and more. We also make initial steps towards studying the realizability of the proposed definitions in various settings.
We prcscnt a general framework for constructing and analyzing authentication protocols in realistic models of communication networks.This framework provides a sound formalization for the authentication problem and suggests simple and attractive design principles for general authentication and key exchange protocols.The key element in our appronch io a modular treatment of the authentication problem in cryptographic protocols; thii applies to the definition of accurity, to the design of the protocols, and to their analysis.In particulnr, following this modular approach, we show how to systematically transform solutions that work in a model of idaalizcd authenticated communications into solutions that are secure in the realistic setting of communication channels controlled by an active adversary.Using these principles we construct and prove the security of simple and practical authentication and key-exchange protocols.In particular, we provide a security analysis of aomo well-known key exchange protocols (e.g.authenticated Dlfllc-Hcllman key exchange), and of some of the techniques underlying the design of several authentication protocols that are currently being deployed on a large scale for the Intornot Protocol and other applications.
We present a general framework for constructing and analyzing authentication protocols in realistic models of communication networks. This framework provides a sound formalization for the authentication problem and suggests simple and attractive design principles for general authentication and key exchange protocols. The key element in our approach is a modular treatment of the authentication problem in cryptographic protocols; this applies to the definition of security, to the design of the protocols, and to their analysis. In particular, following this modular approach, we show how to systematically transform solutions that work in a model of idealized authenticated communications into solutions that are secure in the realistic setting of communication channels controlled by an active adversary. Using these principles we construct and prove the security of simple and practical authentication and key-exchange protocols. In particular, we provide a security analysis of some well-known key exchange protocols (e.g. authenticated Diffie-Hellman key exchange), and of some of the techniques underlying the design of several authentication protocols that are currently being
Security protocols, such as TLS, SSH, IEEE~802.11, and DNSSEC, have become crucial tools in modern society to protect people, data, and infrastructure. They are used throughout virtually all electronic devices to achieve a wide range of different security goals, such as confidentiality, authentication, and integrity. As the long history of attacks on security protocols illustrates, it is indispensable to perform a formal security analysis of such protocols. A central tool in cryptography for taming the complexity of the design and the analysis of modern protocols is modularity, provided by security models for universal composability. Such models allow for designing and analyzing small parts of a protocol in isolation and then reusing these security results in the context of the overall protocol. This is not just easier than analyzing the whole protocol as a monolithic block but also reduces the overall effort required in building and analyzing multiple different protocols based on the same underlying components, such as cryptographic primitives. Ideally, a model for universal composability should support a protocol designer in easily creating full, precise, and detailed specifications as well as sound security proofs of various protocols for various types of adversarial models, instead of being an additional obstacle one has to overcome during a security analysis. In particular, such a model should be sound, flexible/expressive, and easy to use. Unfortunately, despite the wide spread use of models for universal composability, existing models and frameworks are still unsatisfying in these respects as none combines all of these requirements simultaneously. In this thesis we therefore develop a model for universal composability, called the iUC framework, which combines soundness, usability, and flexibility in a so far unmatched way, and hence constitutes a solid framework for designing and analyzing essentially any protocol and application in a modular, universally composable, and sound manner. We use our model in a case study to analyze multiple different key exchange protocols precisely as they are deployed in practice. This illustrates the combination of both flexibility and usability of our model. This case study is also an important independent contribution as this is the first faithful security analysis of these unmodified protocols in a universal composability setting.