network profile
| bio | website | |
|---|---|---|
| location | Berkeley, CA | |
| age | ||
| visits | member for | 1 year, 2 months |
| seen | Apr 23 '12 at 23:19 | |
| stats | profile views | 0 |
|
Mar 30 |
awarded | Supporter |
|
Mar 15 |
awarded | Teacher |
|
Mar 8 |
comment |
Does security under ROM imply exactly what? Thank you for the clarification! Right, so the ROM proofs always employ the random oracle in the strongest possible sense which can not be in any way replaced by a real hash function. Interesting, I guess I should look at some examples of the type that you mentioned. For the quantum oracle I thought that it would always make a list of values that are queried and then in case of a repeated query it outputs the value from the list. |
|
Mar 8 |
comment |
RSA-OAEP versus RSA with Fujisaki-Okamoto construction Thanks. By easier I meant possibly faster to compute but I guess the F-O type construction is really complicated, like you said, and outside the random oracle model it's really hard to say anything. |
|
Mar 7 |
comment |
RSA-OAEP versus RSA with Fujisaki-Okamoto construction What if I use padded RSA by padding with a constant number of random bits? Then if $H_1$ and $H_2$ are two hash functions, $e$ the public exponent, $m$ the message and $r$ a random number, encryption would be $$m \mapsto <(r||H_1(r,m))^e, H_2(r)\oplus m>$$ and this seems to be much easier than OAEP. |
|
Mar 7 |
awarded | Editor |
|
Mar 7 |
revised |
Security analysis of a matrix multiplication protocol added 174 characters in body |
|
Mar 7 |
answered | Security analysis of a matrix multiplication protocol |
|
Mar 7 |
asked | Does security under ROM imply exactly what? |
|
Mar 7 |
awarded | Student |
|
Mar 7 |
asked | RSA-OAEP versus RSA with Fujisaki-Okamoto construction |
