1
$\begingroup$

In Elgamal signature scheme $\text{sig}_{k_{pr}}(x,k_E)=(r,s)$, $s=0$ is not allowed. How does this lead to finding the private key $d$?

$\endgroup$
4
  • $\begingroup$ Did you check that the signature can be verifiable? $\endgroup$
    – kelalaka
    Commented Jan 4, 2022 at 16:45
  • 1
    $\begingroup$ Thanks. For verification we should have $\beta^r.r^s \bmod p=\alpha^x$, which in this particular case leads to $\alpha^{d.r+0}\neq \alpha^x$. And using hash functions will not solve this problem, is it true? $\endgroup$ Commented Jan 4, 2022 at 19:39
  • $\begingroup$ The $m$ should be already the hash of the message, otherwise, the signature space will be limited. I couldn't find a dupe for this. If you want you can write an answer to your question. $\endgroup$
    – kelalaka
    Commented Jan 4, 2022 at 19:55
  • $\begingroup$ Thanks dear Henry. $\endgroup$ Commented Jan 4, 2022 at 20:55

1 Answer 1

1
$\begingroup$

For $s=0$, we will have problem verifying the signature. For verification, we should have $\beta^r \cdot r^s=\alpha^x$. This special case, $s=0$, leads to $\beta^r \cdot r^0=\beta^r=\alpha^{d \cdot r}$ which must be equal to $\alpha^x$, i.e. $d \cdot r=x$, but $d \cdot r$ is equal for every $x$ and this have no meaning.

$\endgroup$
1
  • $\begingroup$ That is more than that. $r$ is public in the signature, then you find the $d$ :) $\endgroup$
    – kelalaka
    Commented Jan 4, 2022 at 21:06

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.