2
$\begingroup$

For the symetric keys it is recommend that the same key should not be used to encrypt large number(2^32) of cipher blocks to avoid the key-exhaustion risk.

Curious to know whether the asymmetric key cryptosystems also has such a risk? i tried to search on internet couldnt find about it

$\endgroup$
3
  • 1
    $\begingroup$ What are the rules for using AES-GCM correctly? That is a different issue. The counter size of AES-GCM is limited; if you pass the limit, you may lose confidentiality and even the authentication key. This is a catastrophic event and it is like two-time pad. We don't have such practical issue in ChaCha20-Poly1305. $\endgroup$
    – kelalaka
    Commented Apr 11 at 15:43
  • $\begingroup$ This question is quite broad since public-key represents encryption and signature with many different shemes. May your moderators limit this question to be answerable? $\endgroup$
    – kelalaka
    Commented Apr 11 at 15:50
  • $\begingroup$ Even for symetric key the KDF functionality remove the key wear out aws.amazon.com/blogs/security/… $\endgroup$
    – Bhuvan
    Commented Apr 16 at 4:03

2 Answers 2

4
$\begingroup$

Such a restriction would no make sense in asymmetric encryption schemes where there is a public key value made freely available to all, including the adversary. This gives the adversary the power to create arbitrarily many matched plain and cipher pairs without any restriction. In symmetric (secret key) cryptography, the adversary notionally obtains information from other parties legitimate use of the private key.

Asymmetric encryption can claim legitimate defence against key exhaustion by typically having a much larger ciphertext space combined with non-deterministic variations.

$\endgroup$
0
2
$\begingroup$

This problem is closely related to tightly-secure encryption schemes in the asymmetric encryption areas (or more precisely in multi-challenge security).

This is because classical security notions like IND-CPA or IND-CCA only consider single-challenge ciphertext. There is a generic transformation from single-challenge to multi-challenge but with a security loss linear to the number of challenge ciphertexts.

Therefore, in theory for asymmetric cryptography, you should not use the same public key too often as well. However, there is a line of research to build tightly-secure encryption schemes, with those schemes you don't need to worry about the "Key Exhaustion Risks".

$\endgroup$

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.