At a high level, the Uber assumption states that it is not possible to compute (distinguish) linearly independent elements. In the decisional version, the problem is restricted to $G_T$, but it is unclear whether the linearly independent elements can be from $G_1$.

Here is a simple example:

Let be type-3 pairing $E$: $(e, G_1, G_2, G_T, g, h)$ where $g$ and $h$ are generators over $G_1$ and $G_2$.

Given $(g^a, g^b, g^c, g^{ab}, h^a, h^b, E)$, the adversary can distinguish $g^{abc}$ or $g^z$?

  • $\begingroup$ In this case you can use MathJax / $\LaTeX$ simply by surrounding your variables / sets with dollar signs. I've performed an edit doing only that. $\endgroup$
    – Maarten Bodewes
    Commented Jul 3, 2023 at 10:12

1 Answer 1


I'm not sure what you mean by linear independent elements, but your example problem is at most as strong as the weakest of a) decisional Diffie-Hellman problem in $\mathbb G_1$ (use the solver on the tuple $g,g^{ab},g^c, \mathrm{candidate}$ b) the computational Diffie-Hellman problem in $\mathbb G_2$ (use the CDH solver to find $h^{ab}$ then compare $e(g^c,h^{ab})$ with $e(\mathrm{candidate},h)$) and c) the decisional Diffie-Hellman in $\mathbb G_T$ (use the solver on the tuple $e(g,h^a),e(g^c,h^a),e(g^b,h^a),e(\mathrm{candidate},h)$).

Given that an adversary can already confirm the consistency of $g,g^a,g^b,g^{ab},h,h^a,h^b$, a more generic attack is to exhibit (not necessarily effectively) the existence of $z\in\mathbb G_2$ such that $e(g,z)=e(g^{ab},h)$ and $e(g^c,z)=e(\mathrm{candidate},h)$, though I cannot see how to express this terms of existing hardness assumptions.


Your Answer

By clicking “Post Your Answer”, you agree to our terms of service and acknowledge you have read our privacy policy.

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