I'm struggling to understand the high-level idea of "Verifiable Delay Functions from Supersingular Isogenies and Pairings" (https://eprint.iacr.org/2019/166.pdf) by De Feo et al.
I will shortly outline the construction (p.12):
setup:
- (choose appropriate parameters)
- Select a supersingular elliptic curve $E/\mathbb{F}_p$.
- Choose a direction on the horizontal l-isogeny graph and compute a cyclic isogeny $\phi : E \rightarrow E'$ of degree $l^T$ and its dual.
- Choose a generator P of X1 = $v^{-1}$($\tilde{E}[N] \cap \tilde{E}(\mathbb{F}_p)$) and compute $\phi(P)$.
eval:
- Compute $\hat{\phi}(Q).$
verify:
- Verify the condition ($e_N(P, \hat{\phi}(Q)) = e_N(\phi(P), Q)$) for the pairing $e_N$.
For step 2, I wonder: Why does the curve need to be supersingular? I think that it has a certain implication on the structure of the isogeny graph from $E$, but that is only my guess.
For step 3: I assume that we do a random walk on the isogeny graph. I think that means: for any elliptic curve $E_0$, we construct an isogeny, compute it, jump to the new curve $E_1$ and repeat this process. I wonder: Isogenies project points between curves, but their result isn't really a new curve. So how can we compute an isogeny from $E_1$ without really knowing it? Why is it important that the isogeny graph is "horizontal"? How can we prove that the isogeny actually takes T steps (.. which is necessary for the delay property of VDFs)? Or do we just publish all T intermediate isogenies? Why can we assume that all of them have order l?
The idea in step 5 and 6 looks clear to me: The condition (which is quick to evaluate) only holds for correctly computed isogenies, which can only be calculated with delay T.
Concerning P: $v : E \rightarrow \tilde{E}$ is defined as $(x,y) \rightarrow (u^2 x, u^3 y)$, $\tilde{E}$ is the quadratic twist of E. I understand that $E$ and $\tilde{E}$ are isomorphic, but I don't see why X1 is constructed in such a complicated way. Why can't we use the points on E as X1?
If my questions are too specific, I'd be more than happy for the explanation of supersingularity in this case! Would the construction also work for ordinary elliptic curves?