Search Results
| Search type | Search syntax |
|---|---|
| Tags | [tag] |
| Exact | "words here" |
| Author |
user:1234 user:me (yours) |
| Score |
score:3 (3+) score:0 (none) |
| Answers |
answers:3 (3+) answers:0 (none) isaccepted:yes hasaccepted:no inquestion:1234 |
| Views | views:250 |
| Code | code:"if (foo != bar)" |
| Sections |
title:apples body:"apples oranges" |
| URL | url:"*.example.com" |
| Saves | in:saves |
| Status |
closed:yes duplicate:no migrated:no wiki:no |
| Types |
is:question is:answer |
| Exclude |
-[tag] -apples |
| For more details on advanced search visit our help page | |
Results tagged with distinguisher
Search options not deleted
user 81286
A distinguisher describes an adversary's advantage. In cryptography, an adversary's advantage is a measure of how successfully it can attack a cryptographic algorithm, by distinguishing it from an idealized version of that type of algorithm.
1
vote
1
answer
105
views
Given an input x, can a distinguisher D output 1/2?
We know such a distinguisher exists and is often given as an example many times.
Now consider another distinguisher strategy, where on input $x$, it checks if $x$ is $0^n$ or $1^n$. … My question is - Is such a distinguisher valid according to the assumptions we make in cryptography? …
- 187
2
votes
1
answer
198
views
Example of not computationally indistinguishable
All the examples that I see for proving that two distributions are not computationally indistinguishable involve a pattern: choose a Distinguisher $D(\cdot)$ such that $D(x)$ is $1$ if $x$ satisfies some … Now I can choose my distinguisher to be $D(x) = 1$, if $x$ ends with $1$. …
- 187
3
votes
1
answer
135
views
why do we take computational distinguishability over ensembles
$D$ (called the “distinguisher”), there
exists a negligible function $e(·)$ such that $∀n ∈ N$
$Pr[t ← X_n, D(t) = 1] − Pr[t ← Y_n, D(t) = 1] < e(n)$
My question is, why do we need ensembles of distribution …
- 187