Two highly-critical papers by Koblitz and Menezes (two well-regarded mathematicians who've contributed to the crypto community) were published years ago: Another Look at “Provable Security” in 2004, Another Look at “Provable Security”. II in 2006.

Have these papers had any noticeable impact on how research is conducted in the provable-security community? Or have these papers largely been ignored?

  • 1
    $\begingroup$ I found several things in the paper interesting and useful. So it has certainly affected my way of thinking. I think we will only see long-term effects. One thing I can foresee is the rebirth of random-oracle model. $\endgroup$
    – Jus12
    Sep 30, 2011 at 6:48
  • $\begingroup$ You can also take a look at this: daimi.au.dk/~ivan/positionpaper.pdf $\endgroup$
    – Daniel
    Mar 13, 2018 at 20:29

1 Answer 1


My impression (which is limited) is that the most researchers are pretty content with the state of security proofs, and it did not have much impact on changing the research agenda of the community. In fact, a related paper was strongly opposed by leading cryptographers. That is not to say the papers were ignored. They generated lots of discussion and maybe some self-reflection.

They are also, unfortunately, sometimes cited by people who do not really understand the issues and just have an axe to grind against papers being too technical.


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.