Abstract In frameworks for universal composability, complex protocols can be built from sub-protocols in a modular way using composition theorems. However, as first pointed out and studied by Canetti and Rabin, this modular approach often leads to impractical implementations. For example, when using a functionality for digital signatures within a more complex protocol, parties have to generate new verification and signing keys for every session of the protocol. This motivates to generalize composition theorems to so-called joint state (composition) theorems, where different copies of a functionality may share some state, e.g., the same verification and signing keys. In this paper, we present a joint state theorem which is more general than the original theorem of Canetti and Rabin, for which several problems and limitations are pointed out. We apply our theorem to obtain joint state realizations for three functionalities: public-key encryption, replayable public-key encryption, and digital signatures. Unlike most other formulations, our functionalities model that ciphertexts and signatures are computed locally, rather than being provided by the adversary. To obtain the joint state realizations, the functionalities have to be designed carefully. Other formulations proposed in the literature are shown to be unsuitable. Our work is based on the IITM model. Our definitions and results demonstrate the expressivity and simplicity of this model. For example, unlike Canetti’s UC model, in the IITM model no explicit joint state operator needs to be defined and the joint state theorem follows immediately from the composition theorem in the IITM model.
Abstract In frameworks for universal composability, complex protocols can be built from sub-protocols in a modular way using composition theorems. However, as first pointed out and studied by Canetti and Rabin, this modular approach often leads to impractical implementations. For example, when using a functionality for digital signatures within a more complex protocol, parties have to generate new verification and signing keys for every session of the protocol. This motivates to generalize composition theorems to so-called joint state (composition) theorems, where different copies of a functionality may share some state, e.g., the same verification and signing keys. In this paper, we present a joint state theorem which is more general than the original theorem of Canetti and Rabin, for which several problems and limitations are pointed out. We apply our theorem to obtain joint state realizations for three functionalities: public-key encryption, replayable public-key encryption, and digital signatures. Unlike most other formulations, our functionalities model that ciphertexts and signatures are computed locally, rather than being provided by the adversary. To obtain the joint state realizations, the functionalities have to be designed carefully. Other formulations proposed in the literature are shown to be unsuitable. Our work is based on the IITM model. Our definitions and results demonstrate the expressivity and simplicity of this model. For example, unlike Canetti’s UC model, in the IITM model no explicit joint state operator needs to be defined and the joint state theorem follows immediately from the composition theorem in the IITM model.
Composition theorems in simulation-based approaches allow to build complex protocols from sub-protocols in a modular way. However, as first pointed out and studied by Canetti and Rabin, this modular approach often leads to impractical implementations. For example, when using a functionality for digital signatures within a more complex protocol, parties have to generate new verification and signing keys for every session of the protocol. This motivates to generalize composition theorems to so-called joint state theorems, where different copies of a functionality may share some state, e.g., the same verification and signing keys. In this paper, we present a joint state theorem which is more general than the original theorem of Canetti and Rabin, for which several problems and limitations are pointed out. We apply our theorem to obtain joint state realizations for three functionalities: public-keyencryption, replayable public-key encryption, and digital signatures. Unlike most other formulations, our functionalities model that cipher texts and signatures are computed locally, rather than being provided by the adversary. To obtain the joint state realizations, the functionalities have to be designed carefully. Other formulations are shown to be unsuitable. Our work is based on a recently proposed, rigorous model for simulation-based security by K{\u}sters, called the IITM model. Our definitions and results demonstrate the expressivity and simplicity of this model. For example, unlike Canetti's UC model, in the IITM model no explicit joint state operator needs to be defined and the joint state theorem follows immediately from the composition theorem in the IITM model.
Composition theorems in simulation-based approaches allow to build complex protocols from sub-protocols in a modular way. However, as first pointed out and studied by Canetti and Rabin, this modular approach often leads to impractical implementations. For example, when using a functionality for digital signatures within a more complex protocol, parties have to generate new verification and signing keys for every session of the protocol. This motivates to generalize composition theorems to so-called joint state theorems, where different copies of a functionality may share some state, e.g., the same verification and signing keys. In this paper, we present a joint state theorem which is more general than the original theorem of Canetti and Rabin, for which several problems and limitations are pointed out. We apply our theorem to obtain joint state realizations for three functionalities: public-keyencryption, replayable public-key encryption, and digital signatures. Unlike most other formulations, our functionalities model that cipher texts and signatures are computed locally, rather than being provided by the adversary. To obtain the joint state realizations, the functionalities have to be designed carefully. Other formulations are shown to be unsuitable. Our work is based on a recently proposed, rigorous model for simulation-based security by K{\"u}sters, called the IITM model. Our definitions and results demonstrate the expressivity and simplicity of this model. For example, unlike Canetti's UC model, in the IITM model no explicit joint state operator needs to be defined and the joint state theorem follows immediately from the composition theorem in the IITM model.
Abstract The universal composability paradigm allows for the modular design and analysis of cryptographic protocols. It has been widely and successfully used in cryptography. However, devising a coherent yet simple and expressive model for universal composability is, as the history of such models shows, highly non-trivial. For example, several partly severe problems have been pointed out in the literature for the UC model. In this work, we propose a coherent model for universal composability, called the IITM model (“Inexhaustible Interactive Turing Machine”). A main feature of the model is that it is stated without a priori fixing irrelevant details, such as a specific way of addressing of machines by session and party identifiers, a specific modeling of corruption, or a specific protocol hierarchy. In addition, we employ a very general notion of runtime. All reasonable protocols and ideal functionalities should be expressible based on this notion in a direct and natural way, and without tweaks, such as (artificial) padding of messages or (artificially) adding extra messages. Not least because of these features, the model is simple and expressive. Also the general results that we prove, such as composition theorems, hold independently of how such details are fixed for concrete applications. Being inspired by other models for universal composability, in particular the UC model and because of the flexibility and expressivity of the IITM model, conceptually, results formulated in these models directly carry over to the IITM model.
The universal composability paradigm allows for the modular design and analysis of cryptographic protocols. It has been widely and successfully used in cryptography. However, devising a coherent yet simple and expressive model for universal composability is, as the history of such models shows, highly non-trivial. For example, several partly severe problems have been pointed out in the literature for the UC model. In this work, we propose a coherent model for universal composability, called the IITM model (“Inexhaustible Interactive Turing Machine”). A main feature of the model is that it is stated without a priori fixing irrelevant details, such as a specific way of addressing of machines by session and party identifiers, a specific modeling of corruption, or a specific protocol hierarchy. In addition, we employ a very general notion of runtime. All reasonable protocols and ideal functionalities should be expressible based on this notion in a direct and natural way, and without tweaks, such as (artificial) padding of messages or (artificially) adding extra messages. Not least because of these features, the model is simple and expressive. Also the general results that we prove, such as composition theorems, hold independently of how such details are fixed for concrete applications. Being inspired by other models for universal composability, in particular the UC model and because of the flexibility and expressivity of the IITM model, conceptually, results formulated in these models directly carry over to the IITM model.
We put forward a framework for the modular design and analysis of multi-party protocols. Our framework is called “GNUC ” (with the recursive meaning “GNUC’s Not UC”), already alluding to the similarity to Canetti’s Universal Composability (UC) framework. In particular, like UC, we offer a universal composition theorem, as well as a theorem for composing protocols with joint state. We deviate from UC in several important aspects. Specifically, we have a rather different view than UC on the structuring of protocols, on the notion of polynomial-time protocols and attacks, and on corruptions. We will motivate our definitional choices by explaining why the definitions in the UC framework are problematic, and how we overcome these problems. Our goal is to offer a framework that is largely compatible with UC, such that previous results formulated in UC carry over to GNUC with minimal changes. We exemplify this by giving explicit formulations for several important protocol tasks, including authenticated and secure communication, as well as commitment and secure function evaluation. 1
Abstract. Cryptographic systems often involve running multiple concurrent instances of some protocol, where the instances have some amount of joint state and randomness. (Examples include systems where multiple protocol instances use the same public-key infrastructure, or the same common reference string.) Rather than attempting to analyze the entire system as a single unit, we would like to be able to analyze each such protocol instance as stand-alone, and then use a general composition theorem to deduce the security of the entire system. However, no known composition theorem applies in this setting, since they all assume that the composed protocol instances have disjoint internal states, and that the internal random choices in the various executions are independent. We propose a new composition operation that can handle the case where different components have some amount of joint state and randomness, and demonstrate sufficient conditions for when the new operation preserves security. The new operation, which is called universal composition with joint state (and is based on the recently proposed universal composition operation), turns out to be very useful in a number of quite different scenarios such as those mentioned above.