Search for: All records

In this survey, the authors review the main quantum algorithms for solving the computational problems that serve as hardness assumptions for cryptosystem. To this end, the authors consider both the currently most widely used classically secure cryptosystems, and the most promising candidates for post‐quantum secure cryptosystems. The authors provide details on the cost of the quantum algorithms presented in this survey. The authors furthermore discuss ongoing research directions that can impact quantum cryptanalysis in the future.

 

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. 

Formulating and designing authentication of classical messages in the presence of adversaries with quantum query access has been a longstanding challenge, as the familiar classical notions of unforgeability do not directly translate into meaningful notions in the quantum setting. A particular difficulty is how to fairly capture the notion of “predicting an unqueried value” when the adversary can query in quantum superposition. We propose a natural definition of unforgeability against quantum adversaries called blind unforgeability. This notion defines a function to be predictable if there exists an adversary who can use “partially blinded” oracle access to predict values in the blinded region. We support the proposal with a number of technical results. We begin by establishing that the notion coincides with EUF-CMA in the classical setting and go on to demonstrate that the notion is satisfied by a number of simple guiding examples, such as random functions and quantum-query-secure pseudorandom functions. We then show the suitability of blind unforgeability for supporting canonical constructions and reductions. We prove that the “hash-and-MAC” paradigm and the Lamport one-time digital signature scheme are indeed unforgeable according to the definition. To support our analysis, we additionally define and study a new variety of quantum-secure hash functions called Bernoulli-preserving. Finally, we demonstrate that blind unforgeability is strictly stronger than a previous definition of Boneh and Zhandry [EUROCRYPT ’13, CRYPTO ’13] and resolve an open problem concerning this previous definition by constructing an explicit function family which is forgeable yet satisfies the definition.