when i reading about this paper, in the Setup of SIM section 5.2, it says that "According to the definition of PFS game", i wonder what the definition of PFS game is?


PFS, or perfect forward secrecy, is a desirable (in many cases) property for cryptographic protocols. It says that even if your long-term secret (or static key in the paper) is revealed at some point, messages sent in the past should still be kept secret.

Right after that line you quote, they define their PFS game. I'll reword it here to make it more generic.

The game is between three parties. Alice, Bob, and Trudy. Alice and Bob are able to exchange messages using the protocol for some period of time (the test session in the paper). During this period, Trudy can only watch the communications (i.e., encrypted messages). After that period of time, Trudy can, whenever she chooses, force Alice or Bob or both to reveal their long-term secrets (could be their corresponding private keys, or it could be a long-term shared symmetric key). At this point, Trudy's goal is to reveal the plaintext of one of the prior messages. If she can do this, the protocol does not have the PFS property.

  • $\begingroup$ i think it's more like a definition of PFS but the game $\endgroup$ – T.B Sep 17 '13 at 13:41
  • $\begingroup$ The game follows almost directly from the definition as it is a pretty simple concept. $\endgroup$ – mikeazo Sep 17 '13 at 14:26
  • $\begingroup$ Security games are one of the common ways to proof security formally. In this case, 3 people play, and if Trudy wins with non-negligible probability, we call it "not secure". PFS is usually achieved, by having session keys depending on both the private longterm secret and additional randomness, where you can't compute the session key without the randomness - which is deleted at the end of the session. $\endgroup$ – tylo Feb 13 '15 at 15:48

I don't think so. I've been looking this up myself, and have found that PFS in cryptology is different from the game term. It seems to be a pet fighting system, like pokemon and the like. I guess the concept has been so popular that the now adult players have made it into a Massively multi-player online role playing game, like World of Warcraft.

So, imagine a enormous world filled with everyone who plays it running around, having their animals fight each other.

I'm pretty sure that's what it is.

  • 3
    $\begingroup$ I was tempted to give this a +1 since it made me laugh. Unfortunately, it is completely wrong, so I had to give it a -1. $\endgroup$ – mikeazo Feb 10 '15 at 18:06
  • 1
    $\begingroup$ This makes me smiling at once. Perfect wording. It's boring to stay serious all the time. Thanx! $\endgroup$ – Vadym Fedyukovych Feb 11 '15 at 9:48

Your Answer

By clicking “Post Your Answer”, you agree to our terms of service, privacy policy and cookie policy

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged or ask your own question.