Abstract
In a highly influential paper from fifteen years ago [10], Canetti, Goldreich, and Halevi showed a fundamental separation between the Random Oracle Model (ROM) and the standard model. They constructed a signature scheme which can be proven secure in the ROM, but is insecure when instantiated with any hash function (and thus insecure in the standard model). In 2011, Boneh et al. defined the notion of the Quantum Random Oracle Model (QROM), where queries to the random oracle may be made in quantum superposition. Because the QROM generalizes the ROM, a proof of security in the QROM is stronger than one in the ROM. This leaves open the possibility that security in the QROM could imply security in the standard model. In this work, we show that this is not the case, and that security in the QROM cannot imply standard-model security. We do this by showing that the original schemes that show a separation between the standard model and the ROM are also secure in the QROM. We consider two schemes that establish such a separation, one with length-restricted messages, and one without, and show both to be secure in the QROM. Our results give further understanding to the landscape of proofs in the ROM versus the QROM or standard model, and point towards the QROM and ROM being much closer to each other than either is to standard model security.
Access this chapter
Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout
Purchases are for personal use only
Similar content being viewed by others
Notes
- 1.
We assume a canonical encoding of functions into binary strings, under which s is the description of a function. Complexity is measured under security parameter \(\lambda \).
- 2.
References
Ambainis, A., Hamburg, M., Unruh, D.: Quantum security proofs using semi-classical oracles. In: Boldyreva, A., Micciancio, D. (eds.) CRYPTO 2019. LNCS, vol. 11693, pp. 269–295. Springer, Cham (2019). https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-26951-7_10
Ambainis, A., Rosmanis, A., Unruh, D.: Quantum attacks on classical proof systems: the hardness of quantum rewinding. In: 2014 IEEE 55th Annual Symposium on Foundations of Computer Science, pp. 474–483. IEEE (2014)
Bellare, M., Boldyreva, A., Palacio, A.: An uninstantiable random-oracle-model scheme for a hybrid-encryption problem. In: Cachin, C., Camenisch, J.L. (eds.) EUROCRYPT 2004. LNCS, vol. 3027, pp. 171–188. Springer, Heidelberg (2004). https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-540-24676-3_11
Bellare, M., Rogaway, P.: Random oracles are practical: a paradigm for designing efficient protocols. In: Proceedings of the 1st ACM Conference on Computer and Communications Security, pp. 62–73. ACM (1993)
Bellare, M., Rogaway, P.: Optimal asymmetric encryption. In: De Santis, A. (ed.) EUROCRYPT 1994. LNCS, vol. 950, pp. 92–111. Springer, Heidelberg (1995). https://doi.org/10.1007/BFb0053428
Bernstein, D.J., Hülsing, A., Kölbl, S., Niederhagen, R., Rijneveld, J., Schwabe, P.: The SPHINCS\(^{+}\) signature framework. In: Proceedings of the 2019 ACM SIGSAC Conference on Computer and Communications Security, CCS 2019, pp. 2129–2146 (2019)
Boneh, D., Dagdelen, Ö., Fischlin, M., Lehmann, A., Schaffner, C., Zhandry, M.: Random oracles in a quantum world. In: Lee, D.H., Wang, X. (eds.) ASIACRYPT 2011. LNCS, vol. 7073, pp. 41–69. Springer, Heidelberg (2011). https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-642-25385-0_3
Boyer, M., Brassard, G., Høyer, P., Tapp, A.: Tight bounds on quantum searching (1996). arXiv:quant-ph/9605034
Canetti, R., Goldreich, O., Halevi, S.: On the random-oracle methodology as applied to length-restricted signature schemes. In: Theory of Cryptography Conference, TCC 2004, pp. 40–57 (2004)
Canetti, R., Goldreich, O., Halevi, S.: The random oracle methodology, revisited. J. ACM 51(4), 557–594 (2004). A preliminary version appeared in STOC 1998
Chiesa, A., Manohar, P., Spooner, N.: Succinct arguments in the quantum random oracle model. Cryptology ePrint Archive, Report 2019/834 (2019). https://eprint.iacr.org/2019/834
CiteseerX: Most cited computer science citations (2015). https://citeseerx.ist.psu.edu/stats/citations
Don, J., Fehr, S., Majenz, C., Schaffner, C.: Security of the Fiat-Shamir transformation in the quantum random-oracle model. In: Boldyreva, A., Micciancio, D. (eds.) CRYPTO 2019. LNCS, vol. 11693, pp. 356–383. Springer, Cham (2019). https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-26951-7_13
Eaton, E.: Leighton-Micali hash-based signatures in the quantum random-oracle model. In: Adams, C., Camenisch, J. (eds.) SAC 2017. LNCS, vol. 10719, pp. 263–280. Springer, Cham (2018). https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-72565-9_13
Eaton, E., Song, F.: Making existential-unforgeable signatures strongly unforgeable in the quantum random-oracle model. In: 10th Conference on the Theory of Quantum Computation, Communication and Cryptography, TQC 2015. LIPIcs, vol. 44, pp. 147–162. Schloss Dagstuhl (2015)
Fiat, A., Shamir, A.: How to prove yourself: practical solutions to identification and signature problems. In: Odlyzko, A.M. (ed.) CRYPTO 1986. LNCS, vol. 263, pp. 186–194. Springer, Heidelberg (1987). https://doi.org/10.1007/3-540-47721-7_12
Goldwasser, S., Kalai, Y.T.: On the (in) security of the Fiat-Shamir paradigm. In: Proceedings of the 44th Annual IEEE Symposium on Foundations of Computer Science, pp. 102–113. IEEE (2003)
Hallgren, S., Smith, A., Song, F.: Classical cryptographic protocols in a quantum world. In: Rogaway, P. (ed.) CRYPTO 2011. LNCS, vol. 6841, pp. 411–428. Springer, Heidelberg (2011). https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-642-22792-9_23
Hofheinz, D., Hövelmanns, K., Kiltz, E.: A modular analysis of the Fujisaki-Okamoto transformation. In: Kalai, Y., Reyzin, L. (eds.) TCC 2017. LNCS, vol. 10677, pp. 341–371. Springer, Cham (2017). https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-70500-2_12
Hülsing, A., Rijneveld, J., Song, F.: Mitigating multi-target attacks in hash-based signatures. In: Cheng, C.-M., Chung, K.-M., Persiano, G., Yang, B.-Y. (eds.) PKC 2016. LNCS, vol. 9614, pp. 387–416. Springer, Heidelberg (2016). https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-662-49384-7_15
Kiltz, E., Lyubashevsky, V., Schaffner, C.: A concrete treatment of Fiat-Shamir signatures in the quantum random-oracle model. In: Nielsen, J.B., Rijmen, V. (eds.) EUROCRYPT 2018. LNCS, vol. 10822, pp. 552–586. Springer, Cham (2018). https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-78372-7_18
Kiltz, E., O’Neill, A., Smith, A.: Instantiability of RSA-OAEP under chosen-plaintext attack. J. Cryptol. 30(3), 889–919 (2017). https://doi.org/10.1007/s00145-016-9238-4
Koblitz, N., Menezes, A.J.: The random oracle model: a twenty-year retrospective. Des. Codes Cryptogr. 77(2), 587–610 (2015). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10623-015-0094-2
Maurer, U., Renner, R., Holenstein, C.: Indifferentiability, impossibility results on reductions, and applications to the random oracle methodology. In: Naor, M. (ed.) TCC 2004. LNCS, vol. 2951, pp. 21–39. Springer, Heidelberg (2004). https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-540-24638-1_2
Micali, S.: Computationally sound proofs. SIAM J. Comput. 30(4), 1253–1298 (2000)
Nielsen, J.B.: Separating random oracle proofs from complexity theoretic proofs: the non-committing encryption case. In: Yung, M. (ed.) CRYPTO 2002. LNCS, vol. 2442, pp. 111–126. Springer, Heidelberg (2002). https://doi.org/10.1007/3-540-45708-9_8
NIST: Post-quantum cryptography (2019). https://csrc.nist.gov/Projects/post-quantum-cryptography
Ben Sasson, E., et al.: Zerocash: decentralized anonymous payments from bitcoin. In: 2014 IEEE Symposium on Security and Privacy, pp. 459–474. IEEE (2014)
Shor, P.W.: Polynomial-time algorithms for prime factorization and discrete logarithms on a quantum computer. SIAM J. Comput. 26(5), 1484–1509 (1997)
Unruh, D.: Non-interactive zero-knowledge proofs in the quantum random oracle model. In: Oswald, E., Fischlin, M. (eds.) EUROCRYPT 2015. LNCS, vol. 9057, pp. 755–784. Springer, Heidelberg (2015). https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-662-46803-6_25
Zhandry, M.: How to construct quantum random functions. In: 2012 IEEE 53rd Annual Symposium on Foundations of Computer Science, pp. 679–687. IEEE (2012)
Zhandry, M.: A note on the quantum collision and set equality problems. Quantum Inf. Comput. 15(7–8), 557–567 (2015)
Zhandry, M.: How to record quantum queries, and applications to quantum indifferentiability. In: Boldyreva, A., Micciancio, D. (eds.) CRYPTO 2019. LNCS, vol. 11693, pp. 239–268. Springer, Cham (2019). https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-26951-7_9
Acknowledgments
E.E. acknowledges the support of the Natural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada (NSERC) for grant 401230696. F.S. acknowledges the support by the National Science Foundation.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Editor information
Editors and Affiliations
Rights and permissions
Copyright information
© 2020 Springer Nature Switzerland AG
About this paper
Cite this paper
Eaton, E., Song, F. (2020). A Note on the Instantiability of the Quantum Random Oracle. In: Ding, J., Tillich, JP. (eds) Post-Quantum Cryptography. PQCrypto 2020. Lecture Notes in Computer Science(), vol 12100. Springer, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-44223-1_27
Download citation
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-44223-1_27
Published:
Publisher Name: Springer, Cham
Print ISBN: 978-3-030-44222-4
Online ISBN: 978-3-030-44223-1
eBook Packages: Computer ScienceComputer Science (R0)