1
$\begingroup$

I have looked at the idea of dual ciphers but I cannot convince myself I really understand them. I think I just need a very simple worked example.

I was given the definition: Two ciphers $E$ and $E′$ are dual ciphers if they are isomorphic, i.e. if there exist invertible transformations $f(⋅)$, $g(⋅)$, $h(⋅)$ such that $\forall \ P$ and $K$ $$f(E_K(P))=E′_{g(K)}(h(P))$$ However, this is not easy for me to follow. I think $E$ is the encryption method (in my case below, $[(P \times K_1)+ K_2] \bmod26$). Yet looking at the definition it seems $f(.)$ is the cipher, is that right? And $P$ and $K$ are the plaintext and cipher key respectively. But I really don't understand what $g(K)$ and $h(P)$ are, or how to derive them.

Let's say my encryption cipher is: $C = [(P \times K_1)+ K_2] \bmod26$

  1. How do I make a dual cipher of it? A very simple one is fine. If my cipher is not suitable, would you give an equally simple one that can have a dual cipher?
  2. In my dual cipher from $.1$, what are my $g(K)$ and $h(P)$?
  3. What could I do to this cipher to makes it a tweak but not a dual cipher?
  4. How do I show my tweak is not a dual cipher?

This has been bugging me for a while so a simple example would be very much appreciated. I have posted similar questions but the answers are too difficult for my age and level.

$\endgroup$
1
$\begingroup$

So, an obvious way to build a dual cipher is to make it the same cipher: $h = id$, $g = id$, $f=id$. But that probably doesn't help your understanding.

I will a slightly less trivial example of a very simple dual cipher for your $E_{K_1, K_2}(P) = [(P \cdot K_1) + K_2]\ mod\ 26$.

$E'_{K_1,K_2}(P) = [((P+5)\cdot K_1) + K_2]\ mod\ 26$

which is dual for $h(x) = x-5$, $g = id$, $f = id$.

You could also pick

$E''_{K_1,K_2}(P) = [((P+5)\cdot K_1) + K_2]\ mod\ 13$ which is still dual for $f(x) = x\ mod\ 13$.

So two ciphers are dual if you can ANY $h, g$ and $f$ such that the above equations hold.

Now, what is the difference between this and a tweak? A tweakable block cipher has an extra input which can be public but will still changes the permutation the cipher uses. That means that

$E_{K_1, K_2}(P, t) = [((P + t) \cdot K_1) + K_2]\ mod\ 26$

could be considered a tweakable block cipher but as we saw earlier all these ciphers are dual.

$\endgroup$
  • $\begingroup$ Sorry, but what is $id$? And here I see $h(x)$ and not $h(P)$. Are they the same? I am asking because when I sub in $P = P+5$ I get the same result. And is $f(x)$ the actual cipher method? In your example, is $x = ([P+5].K_1)K_2$? I am still confused because I suddenly see $x$ when there is none shown in the ciphers. Looking at your cipher, $E''$, it seems $h(P) = P+5$ but what are $g(K_1)$ and $g(K_2)$ equal to in the dual cipher? $\endgroup$ – Red Book 1 Feb 14 '18 at 9:55
  • $\begingroup$ $id$ is the identity function $id(x) = x$. This means it does nothing. $\endgroup$ – Elias Feb 14 '18 at 10:31
  • $\begingroup$ $h(x) = x - 5$ is a function definition, it doesn't matter what $x$ is called. $h(y) = y - 5$ is the same function. $\endgroup$ – Elias Feb 14 '18 at 10:32
  • $\begingroup$ $f$ can be any function, not necessarily a block cipher. I'm not sure what you mean by "actual cipher method". $\endgroup$ – Elias Feb 14 '18 at 10:32
  • $\begingroup$ I see. So $h(P) = P + 5$ is correct? And does $g(K_1) = K_1$ and $g(K_2) = K_2$? If this is right, is this not always the case? I mean, how could we change $g(K_i)$ for two ciphers to remain dual? By 'actual cipher' I just meant the whole process of encryption, i.e. in my original cipher it would be $[(P.K_1)+K_2] \bmod 26$. And in this case, what is $f(x)$? $\endgroup$ – Red Book 1 Feb 14 '18 at 11:50
2
$\begingroup$

For distinct tweaks $t \ne \tau$, the ciphers $E_{k,t}$ and $E_{k,\tau}$ should appear to be independent uniform random permutations for uniform random $k$. For example, you could think of it like having a single-bit tweakable block cipher where $E_{k,0} = \operatorname{AES256}_{k_0}$ and $E_{k,1} = \operatorname{Serpent256}_{k_1}$, where $k_0$ and $k_1$ are like magic independent uniform random bit strings somehow both deterministically derived from $k$.

For dual ciphers $E \ne E'$, $E_k$ and $E'_k$ are very much not independent—there is a deterministic relation between them for every $k$, namely $f(E_k(p)) = E'_{g(k)}(h(p))$ for some deterministic functions $f$, $g$, and $h$.

$\endgroup$

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.