International Association for Cryptologic Research

International Association
for Cryptologic Research

CryptoDB

Minh-Huyen Nguyen

Publications

Year
Venue
Title
2008
JOFC
2006
EPRINT
Statistical Zero-Knowledge Arguments for NP from Any One-Way Function
Minh-Huyen Nguyen Shien Jin Ong Salil P. Vadhan
We show that every language in NP has a *statistical* zero-knowledge argument system under the (minimal) complexity assumption that one-way functions exist. In such protocols, even a computationally unbounded verifier cannot learn anything other than the fact that the assertion being proven is true, whereas a polynomial-time prover cannot convince the verifier to accept a false assertion except with negligible probability. This resolves an open question posed by Naor, Ostrovsky, Venkatesan, and Yung (CRYPTO `92, J. Cryptology `98). Departing from previous works on this problem, we do not construct standard statistically hiding commitments from any one-way function. Instead, we construct a relaxed variant of commitment schemes called "1-out-of-2-binding commitments," recently introduced by Nguyen and Vadhan (STOC `06).
2005
TCC
2004
TCC
2004
EPRINT
Simpler Session-Key Generation from Short Random Passwords
Minh-Huyen Nguyen Salil P. Vadhan
Goldreich and Lindell (CRYPTO `01) recently presented the first protocol for password-authenticated key exchange in the standard model (with no common reference string or set-up assumptions other than the shared password). However, their protocol uses several heavy tools and has a complicated analysis. We present a simplification of the Goldreich--Lindell (GL) protocol and analysis for the special case when the dictionary is of the form $D=\{0,1\}^d$, i.e. the password is a short random string (like an ATM PIN number). Our protocol can be converted into one for arbitrary dictionaries using a common reference string of logarithmic length. The security bound achieved by our protocol is somewhat worse than the GL protocol. Roughly speaking, our protocol guarantees that the adversary can ``break'' the scheme with probability at most $O(\mathrm{poly}(n)/|D|)^{\Omega(1)}$, whereas the GL protocol guarantees a bound of $O(1/|D|)$. We also present an alternative, more natural definition of security than the ``augmented definition'' of Goldreich and Lindell, and prove that the two definitions are equivalent.

Coauthors

Shien Jin Ong (1)
Salil P. Vadhan (4)