UC Security Model of Position-Based Key Exchange

Lawrence Roy, Jiayu Xu

A Password-Authenticated Key Exchange (PAKE) protocol allows two parties to agree upon a cryptographic key, when the only information shared in advance is a low-entropy password. The standard security notion for PAKE (Canetti et al., Eurocrypt 2005) is in the Universally Composable (UC) framework. We show that unlike most UC security notions, UC PAKE does not imply correctness. While Canetti et al. has briefly noticed this issue, we present the first comprehensive study of correctness in UC PAKE: We show that TrivialPAKE, a no-message protocol that does not satisfy correctness, is a UC PAKE; We propose nine approaches to guaranteeing correctness in the UC security notion of PAKE, and show that seven of them are equivalent, whereas the other two are unachievable; We prove that a direct solution, namely changing the UC PAKE functionality to incorporate correctness, is impossible; Finally, we show how to naturally incorporate correctness by changing the model—we view PAKE as a three-party protocol, with the man-in-the-middle adversary as the third party. In this way, we hope to shed some light on the very nature of UC-security in the man-in-the-middle setting.

Xichen Zhang, Keitaro Hashimoto, Wakaha Ogata

Fengyu Luan, Yan Zhang, Zheng Fanfan +2 more

M. Choudary Gorantla, Colin Boyd, Juan Manuel González Nieto

We treat the security of group key exchange (GKE) in the universal composability (UC) framework. Analyzing GKE protocols in the UC framework naturally addresses attacks by malicious insiders. We define an ideal functionality for GKE that captures contributiveness in addition to other desired security goals. We show that an efficient two-round protocol securely realizes the proposed functionality in the random oracle model. As a result, we obtain the most efficient UC-secure contributory GKE protocol known.

James Bartusek, Jake Januzelli

Encrypted key exchange (EKE), introduced by Bellovin and Merritt (IEEE S\&P 1992), and Masny-Rindal OT, introduced by Masny and Rindal (ACM CCS 2019), are highly-efficient methods for compiling essentially any KEM into advanced cryptographic protocols, namely password-authenticated key exchange (PAKE) and oblivious transfer (OT), by relying only on idealized symmetric-key primitives. They have become leading candidates for practically-implementable PAKE and OT due to (1) their simplicity, (2) their plug-and-play nature, allowing for flexibility in the choice of KEM, and (3) existing proofs of UC-security (in the classical adversarial model). Due to point (2) above, these compilers yield attractive candidates for efficient \emph{post-quantum} PAKE and OT, especially given the recent post-quantum KEM standardization efforts. This motivates the question of whether the (UC-)security of these compilers translates to the quantum adversarial model. In this work, we show that it does not. In particular, we prove that a general family of (O)EKE protocols, as well as Masny-Rindal OT, are \emph{not} UC-secure against quantum polynomial-time adversaries, even when instantiated with a post-quantum KEM. To establish UC-insecurity, we devise an adversarial strategy that provably thwarts any attempt by the simulator to extract its input (the password in the case of PAKE, and the receiver's choice bit in the case of OT). To complement these negative results, we establish that both compilers yield certain notions of \emph{game-based} security. Along the way, we establish a novel ``advantage-tight'' one-way to hiding lemma that may be of independent interest.

Colin Boyd, Wenbo Mao