Cryptography for the quantum internet
Elements of a “quantum TLS”
Christian Majenz
Colloquium Informatics Institute, University of Amsterdam
Cryptography for the quantum internet Elements of a quantum TLS - - PowerPoint PPT Presentation
Cryptography for the quantum internet Elements of a quantum TLS Christian Majenz Colloquium Informatics Institute, University of Amsterdam Quantum computers Quantum computers Accelerating effort to build a quantum computer Quantum
Colloquium Informatics Institute, University of Amsterdam
Need a quantum network!
Let’s have a look how the classical internet is secured.
Let’s have a look how the classical internet is secured.
Let’s have a look how the classical internet is secured.
Functionalities
Functionalities
(Server) authentication
Functionalities
Key establishment (Server) authentication
Functionalities
Key establishment Secure communication Session (Server) authentication
Functionalities
Key establishment Secure communication Session (Server) authentication Digital signatures
Protocols
Functionalities
Key establishment Secure communication Session (Server) authentication Key exchange/ Key encapsulation Digital signatures
Protocols
Functionalities
Key establishment Secure communication Session (Server) authentication Key exchange/ Key encapsulation Authenticated encryption Digital signatures
Protocols
Functionalities
Key establishment Secure communication Session (Server) authentication
Cryptographic Ingredients
Key exchange/ Key encapsulation Authenticated encryption Digital signatures Hash functions Block ciphers Modes of
Protocols …
Functionalities
Key establishment Secure communication Session (Server) authentication
Cryptographic Ingredients
Key exchange/ Key encapsulation Authenticated encryption Digital signatures Hash functions Block ciphers Modes of
Quantum- ready? Protocols …
Alice Bob
Alice Bob
m
Alice Bob
sk pk m
Alice Bob
sk pk σ = Signsk(m) m
(m, σ)
Alice Bob
sk pk σ = Signsk(m) m
(m, σ)
Alice Bob
sk pk Verpk(m, σ) = accept σ = Signsk(m) m
(m, σ)
Alice Bob
sk pk Verpk(m, σ) = accept σ = Signsk(m) m
Security: If was produced from without using , then
(m′ , σ′ ) (m, σ) sk Verpk(m′ , σ′ ) = reject
(m, σ)
Alice Bob
sk pk Verpk(m, σ) = accept σ = Signsk(m) m
Security: If was produced from without using , then
(m′ , σ′ ) (m, σ) sk Verpk(m′ , σ′ ) = reject
Slightly simplified…
What about signatures for quantum messages?
What about signatures for quantum messages? Theorem (Barnum et al. ’02; Alagic, Gagliardoni, M ’18): Quantum information cannot be signed.
What about signatures for quantum messages? Theorem (Barnum et al. ’02; Alagic, Gagliardoni, M ’18): Quantum information cannot be signed. Consequence of linearity of quantum theory, uses tools like “Channel Uhlman” (Kretschman ’06)
What about signatures for quantum messages? Theorem (Barnum et al. ’02; Alagic, Gagliardoni, M ’18): Quantum information cannot be signed.
Consequence of linearity of quantum theory, uses tools like “Channel Uhlman” (Kretschman ’06)
Functionalities
Key establishment Secure communication Session (Server) authentication Key exchange/ Key encapsulation Authenticated encryption Digital signatures Hash functions Block ciphers Modes of
Cryptographic Ingredients Quantum- ready? Protocols
Functionalities
Key establishment Secure communication Session (Server) authentication Key exchange/ Key encapsulation Authenticated encryption Digital signatures
Hash functions Block ciphers Modes of
Cryptographic Ingredients Quantum- ready? Protocols
Functionalities
Key establishment Secure communication Session (Server) authentication Key exchange/ Key encapsulation Authenticated encryption Digital signatures
Hash functions Block ciphers Modes of
Cryptographic Ingredients Quantum- ready? Protocols
Functionalities
Key establishment Secure communication Session (Server) authentication Key exchange/ Key encapsulation Authenticated encryption Digital signatures
Hash functions Block ciphers Modes of
Cryptographic Ingredients Quantum- ready? Protocols
Functionalities
Key establishment Secure communication Session (Server) authentication Key exchange/ Key encapsulation Authenticated encryption Digital signatures
Hash functions Block ciphers Modes of
Cryptographic Ingredients Quantum- ready? Protocols
VvegyqO kSTbfH3 bnHHLM
H
VvegyqO kSTbfH3 bnHHLM
Ubiquitous in cryptography. Examples:
H
Output should look random! Formalization difficult…
Output should look random! Formalization difficult… just model as random, “Random Oracle Model” (ROM)
⟹ H
Output should look random! Formalization difficult… just model as random, “Random Oracle Model” (ROM)
⟹ H
Reality
Output should look random! Formalization difficult… just model as random, “Random Oracle Model” (ROM)
⟹ H
Reality Model Uniformly random
H : {0,1}* → {0,1}n
All agents have
Output should look random! Formalization difficult… just model as random, “Random Oracle Model” (ROM)
⟹ H
Reality Model Uniformly random
H : {0,1}* → {0,1}n
All agents have
quantum Quantum Random Oracle Model (Boneh et al. ’10)
(m, σ)
Alice Bob
sk pk Verpk(m, σ) = accept σ = Signsk(m) m
Security: If was produced from without using , then
(m′ , σ′ ) (m, σ) sk Verpk(m′ , σ′ ) = reject
(m, σ)
Alice Bob
sk pk Verpk(m, σ) = accept σ = Signsk(m) m
Security: If was produced from without using , then
(m′ , σ′ ) (m, σ) sk Verpk(m′ , σ′ ) = reject
Computed in polynomial time
(m, σ)
Alice Bob
sk pk Verpk(m, σ) = accept σ = Signsk(m) m
Security: If was produced from without using , then
(m′ , σ′ ) (m, σ) sk Verpk(m′ , σ′ ) = reject
Computed in quantum polynomial time
Goal: Standardize post-quantum secure signatures and key encapsulation mechanisms.
Goal: Standardize post-quantum secure signatures and key encapsulation mechanisms.
4/9 round 2 signature schemes use Fiat Shamir transformation
Removes interaction from identification schemes using hash functions Like signature but with interactive verification
Removes interaction from identification schemes using hash functions Digital signature scheme
⟹
Well-known: Security in the Random Oracle Model
Removes interaction from identification schemes using hash functions Digital signature scheme
⟹
Well-known: Security in the Random Oracle Model
Removes interaction from identification schemes using hash functions How about the Quantum Random Oracle Model (QROM)? Digital signature scheme
⟹
Well-known: Security in the Random Oracle Model
Removes interaction from identification schemes using hash functions How about the Quantum Random Oracle Model (QROM)? Theorem (Don, Fehr, M, Schaffner ’19): Fiat Shamir signatures are secure in the QROM. Digital signature scheme
⟹
Well-known: Security in the Random Oracle Model
Removes interaction from identification schemes using hash functions How about the Quantum Random Oracle Model (QROM)? Theorem (Don, Fehr, M, Schaffner ’19): Fiat Shamir signatures are secure in the QROM. Also proven concurrently by Liu, Zhandry. Less tight reduction. Digital signature scheme
⟹
Well-known: Security in the Random Oracle Model
Removes interaction from identification schemes using hash functions How about the Quantum Random Oracle Model (QROM)? Theorem (Don, Fehr, M, Schaffner ’19): Fiat Shamir signatures are secure in the QROM. Also proven concurrently by Liu, Zhandry. Less tight reduction. Digital signature scheme
⟹
More efficient NIST candidate signature schemes!!!
Well-known: Security in the Random Oracle Model
Removes interaction from identification schemes using hash functions How about the Quantum Random Oracle Model (QROM)? Theorem (Don, Fehr, M, Schaffner ’19): Fiat Shamir signatures are secure in the QROM. Also proven concurrently by Liu, Zhandry. Less tight reduction. Digital signature scheme
⟹
More efficient NIST candidate signature schemes!!!
This is what Quantum Key Distribution (QKD) can do!*
This is what Quantum Key Distribution (QKD) can do!* Unconditionally secure!!
This is what Quantum Key Distribution (QKD) can do!* Unconditionally secure!! Alternative: post-quantum secure Key Encapsulation
This is what Quantum Key Distribution (QKD) can do!* Unconditionally secure!! Alternative: post-quantum secure Key Encapsulation
more efficient
⟹
This is what Quantum Key Distribution (QKD) can do!* Unconditionally secure!! Alternative: post-quantum secure Key Encapsulation
more efficient
⟹
internet crypto…)
Functionalities
Key establishment Secure communication Session (Server) authentication Key exchange/ Key encapsulation Authenticated encryption Digital signatures
Hash functions Block ciphers Modes of
Cryptographic Ingredients Quantum- ready? Protocols
Functionalities
Key establishment Secure communication Session (Server) authentication Key exchange/ Key encapsulation Authenticated encryption Digital signatures
Hash functions Block ciphers Modes of
Cryptographic Ingredients Quantum- ready? Protocols
Alice Bob
Alice Bob
m
Alice Bob
k m k
Alice Bob
k c = Enck(m) m k
c
Alice Bob
k c = Enck(m) m k
c
Alice Bob
k Deck(c) = m c = Enck(m) m k
c
Alice Bob
k Deck(c) = m c = Enck(m) m k
Confidentiality: doesn’t tell you anything about .
c m
c
Alice Bob
k Deck(c) = m c = Enck(m) m k
Confidentiality: doesn’t tell you anything about .
c m
Integrity: If was produced from without using , then
c′ c k Deck(c′ ) = reject
c
Alice Bob
k Deck(c) = m c = Enck(m) m k
Confidentiality: doesn’t tell you anything about .
c m
Integrity: If was produced from without using , then
c′ c k Deck(c′ ) = reject
Slightly simplified…
c
Alice Bob
k Deck(c) = m c = Enck(m) m k
Confidentiality: doesn’t tell you anything about .
c m
Integrity: If was produced from without using , then
c′ c k Deck(c′ ) = reject
Confidentiality+Integrity=Authenticated encryption
Alternative characterization (Shrimpton ’04):
Real Ideal Alternative characterization (Shrimpton ’04):
Real Ideal
Enck Deck
Alternative characterization (Shrimpton ’04):
Real Ideal
Enck Enck Deck
$ Alternative characterization (Shrimpton ’04):
Real Ideal
Enck Enck Deck
$
reject
Alternative characterization (Shrimpton ’04):
Real Ideal
Enck Enck Deck
$
reject
Except that = Alternative characterization (Shrimpton ’04):
Real Ideal
Enck Enck Deck
$
reject
Except that = Enforced by keeping a list Of input-output-pairs
Alternative characterization (Shrimpton ’04):
Except that = Enforced by keeping a list Of input-output-pairs
Problem 2: Measurement disturbance
Solution 1: Purify “$” Problem 2: Measurement disturbance
Enck
$
Solution 1: Purify “$” Problem 2: Measurement disturbance
Solution 2: Even CPA-secure encryption is randomized… record the randomness!
Solution 1: Purify “$” Alagic, Gagliardoni, M ‘18: Definition of quantum authenticated encryption
Problem 2: Measurement disturbance
Solution 2: Even CPA-secure encryption is randomized… record the randomness!
To some extent:
To some extent:
purpuse
To some extent:
purpuse
To some extent:
purpuse
To some extent:
purpuse
To some extent:
purpuse
unconditional security à la QKD?
To some extent:
purpuse
unconditional security à la QKD?
To some extent:
purpuse
unconditional security à la QKD?
“quantum block ciphers”
To some extent:
purpuse
unconditional security à la QKD?
“quantum block ciphers”
To some extent:
purpuse
unconditional security à la QKD?
“quantum block ciphers”
Thank you very much for your attention! =
Enck
$