1. History of Cryptography Cryptography (From Greek , Hidden
Total Page:16
File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb
Load more
Recommended publications
-
Improved Cryptanalysis of the Reduced Grøstl Compression Function, ECHO Permutation and AES Block Cipher
Improved Cryptanalysis of the Reduced Grøstl Compression Function, ECHO Permutation and AES Block Cipher Florian Mendel1, Thomas Peyrin2, Christian Rechberger1, and Martin Schl¨affer1 1 IAIK, Graz University of Technology, Austria 2 Ingenico, France [email protected],[email protected] Abstract. In this paper, we propose two new ways to mount attacks on the SHA-3 candidates Grøstl, and ECHO, and apply these attacks also to the AES. Our results improve upon and extend the rebound attack. Using the new techniques, we are able to extend the number of rounds in which available degrees of freedom can be used. As a result, we present the first attack on 7 rounds for the Grøstl-256 output transformation3 and improve the semi-free-start collision attack on 6 rounds. Further, we present an improved known-key distinguisher for 7 rounds of the AES block cipher and the internal permutation used in ECHO. Keywords: hash function, block cipher, cryptanalysis, semi-free-start collision, known-key distinguisher 1 Introduction Recently, a new wave of hash function proposals appeared, following a call for submissions to the SHA-3 contest organized by NIST [26]. In order to analyze these proposals, the toolbox which is at the cryptanalysts' disposal needs to be extended. Meet-in-the-middle and differential attacks are commonly used. A recent extension of differential cryptanalysis to hash functions is the rebound attack [22] originally applied to reduced (7.5 rounds) Whirlpool (standardized since 2000 by ISO/IEC 10118-3:2004) and a reduced version (6 rounds) of the SHA-3 candidate Grøstl-256 [14], which both have 10 rounds in total. -
Key-Dependent Approximations in Cryptanalysis. an Application of Multiple Z4 and Non-Linear Approximations
KEY-DEPENDENT APPROXIMATIONS IN CRYPTANALYSIS. AN APPLICATION OF MULTIPLE Z4 AND NON-LINEAR APPROXIMATIONS. FX Standaert, G Rouvroy, G Piret, JJ Quisquater, JD Legat Universite Catholique de Louvain, UCL Crypto Group, Place du Levant, 3, 1348 Louvain-la-Neuve, standaert,rouvroy,piret,quisquater,[email protected] Linear cryptanalysis is a powerful cryptanalytic technique that makes use of a linear approximation over some rounds of a cipher, combined with one (or two) round(s) of key guess. This key guess is usually performed by a partial decryp- tion over every possible key. In this paper, we investigate a particular class of non-linear boolean functions that allows to mount key-dependent approximations of s-boxes. Replacing the classical key guess by these key-dependent approxima- tions allows to quickly distinguish a set of keys including the correct one. By combining different relations, we can make up a system of equations whose solu- tion is the correct key. The resulting attack allows larger flexibility and improves the success rate in some contexts. We apply it to the block cipher Q. In parallel, we propose a chosen-plaintext attack against Q that reduces the required number of plaintext-ciphertext pairs from 297 to 287. 1. INTRODUCTION In its basic version, linear cryptanalysis is a known-plaintext attack that uses a linear relation between input-bits, output-bits and key-bits of an encryption algorithm that holds with a certain probability. If enough plaintext-ciphertext pairs are provided, this approximation can be used to assign probabilities to the possible keys and to locate the most probable one. -
Classical Encryption Techniques
CPE 542: CRYPTOGRAPHY & NETWORK SECURITY Chapter 2: Classical Encryption Techniques Dr. Lo’ai Tawalbeh Computer Engineering Department Jordan University of Science and Technology Jordan Dr. Lo’ai Tawalbeh Fall 2005 Introduction Basic Terminology • plaintext - the original message • ciphertext - the coded message • key - information used in encryption/decryption, and known only to sender/receiver • encipher (encrypt) - converting plaintext to ciphertext using key • decipher (decrypt) - recovering ciphertext from plaintext using key • cryptography - study of encryption principles/methods/designs • cryptanalysis (code breaking) - the study of principles/ methods of deciphering ciphertext Dr. Lo’ai Tawalbeh Fall 2005 1 Cryptographic Systems Cryptographic Systems are categorized according to: 1. The operation used in transferring plaintext to ciphertext: • Substitution: each element in the plaintext is mapped into another element • Transposition: the elements in the plaintext are re-arranged. 2. The number of keys used: • Symmetric (private- key) : both the sender and receiver use the same key • Asymmetric (public-key) : sender and receiver use different key 3. The way the plaintext is processed : • Block cipher : inputs are processed one block at a time, producing a corresponding output block. • Stream cipher: inputs are processed continuously, producing one element at a time (bit, Dr. Lo’ai Tawalbeh Fall 2005 Cryptographic Systems Symmetric Encryption Model Dr. Lo’ai Tawalbeh Fall 2005 2 Cryptographic Systems Requirements • two requirements for secure use of symmetric encryption: 1. a strong encryption algorithm 2. a secret key known only to sender / receiver •Y = Ek(X), where X: the plaintext, Y: the ciphertext •X = Dk(Y) • assume encryption algorithm is known •implies a secure channel to distribute key Dr. -
Related-Key Cryptanalysis of 3-WAY, Biham-DES,CAST, DES-X, Newdes, RC2, and TEA
Related-Key Cryptanalysis of 3-WAY, Biham-DES,CAST, DES-X, NewDES, RC2, and TEA John Kelsey Bruce Schneier David Wagner Counterpane Systems U.C. Berkeley kelsey,schneier @counterpane.com [email protected] f g Abstract. We present new related-key attacks on the block ciphers 3- WAY, Biham-DES, CAST, DES-X, NewDES, RC2, and TEA. Differen- tial related-key attacks allow both keys and plaintexts to be chosen with specific differences [KSW96]. Our attacks build on the original work, showing how to adapt the general attack to deal with the difficulties of the individual algorithms. We also give specific design principles to protect against these attacks. 1 Introduction Related-key cryptanalysis assumes that the attacker learns the encryption of certain plaintexts not only under the original (unknown) key K, but also under some derived keys K0 = f(K). In a chosen-related-key attack, the attacker specifies how the key is to be changed; known-related-key attacks are those where the key difference is known, but cannot be chosen by the attacker. We emphasize that the attacker knows or chooses the relationship between keys, not the actual key values. These techniques have been developed in [Knu93b, Bih94, KSW96]. Related-key cryptanalysis is a practical attack on key-exchange protocols that do not guarantee key-integrity|an attacker may be able to flip bits in the key without knowing the key|and key-update protocols that update keys using a known function: e.g., K, K + 1, K + 2, etc. Related-key attacks were also used against rotor machines: operators sometimes set rotors incorrectly. -
Amy Bell Abilene, TX December 2005
Compositional Cryptology Thesis Presented to the Honors Committee of McMurry University In partial fulfillment of the requirements for Undergraduate Honors in Math By Amy Bell Abilene, TX December 2005 i ii Acknowledgements I could not have completed this thesis without all the support of my professors, family, and friends. Dr. McCoun especially deserves many thanks for helping me to develop the idea of compositional cryptology and for all the countless hours spent discussing new ideas and ways to expand my thesis. Because of his persistence and dedication, I was able to learn and go deeper into the subject matter than I ever expected. My committee members, Dr. Rittenhouse and Dr. Thornburg were also extremely helpful in giving me great advice for presenting my thesis. I also want to thank my family for always supporting me through everything. Without their love and encouragement I would never have been able to complete my thesis. Thanks also should go to my wonderful roommates who helped to keep me motivated during the final stressful months of my thesis. I especially want to thank my fiancé, Gian Falco, who has always believed in me and given me so much love and support throughout my college career. There are many more professors, coaches, and friends that I want to thank not only for encouraging me with my thesis, but also for helping me through all my pursuits at school. Thank you to all of my McMurry family! iii Preface The goal of this research was to gain a deeper understanding of some existing cryptosystems, to implement these cryptosystems in a computer programming language of my choice, and to discover whether the composition of cryptosystems leads to greater security. -
Impossible Differential Cryptanalysis of TEA, XTEA and HIGHT
Preliminaries Impossible Differential Attacks on TEA and XTEA Impossible Differential Cryptanalysis of HIGHT Conclusion Impossible Differential Cryptanalysis of TEA, XTEA and HIGHT Jiazhe Chen1;2 Meiqin Wang1;2 Bart Preneel2 1Shangdong University, China 2KU Leuven, ESAT/COSIC and IBBT, Belgium AfricaCrypt 2012 July 10, 2012 1 / 27 Preliminaries Impossible Differential Attacks on TEA and XTEA Impossible Differential Cryptanalysis of HIGHT Conclusion Preliminaries Impossible Differential Attack TEA, XTEA and HIGHT Impossible Differential Attacks on TEA and XTEA Deriving Impossible Differentials for TEA and XTEA Key Recovery Attacks on TEA and XTEA Impossible Differential Cryptanalysis of HIGHT Impossible Differential Attacks on HIGHT Conclusion 2 / 27 I Pr(∆A ! ∆B) = 1, Pr(∆G ! ∆F) = 1, ∆B 6= ∆F, Pr(∆A ! ∆G) = 0 I Extend the impossible differential forward and backward to attack a block cipher I Guess subkeys in Part I and Part II, if there is a pair meets ∆A and ∆G, then the subkey guess must be wrong P I A B F G II C Preliminaries Impossible Differential Attacks on TEA and XTEA Impossible Differential Cryptanalysis of HIGHT Conclusion Impossible Differential Attack Impossible Differential Attack 3 / 27 I Pr(∆A ! ∆B) = 1, Pr(∆G ! ∆F) = 1, ∆B 6= ∆F, Pr(∆A ! ∆G) = 0 I Extend the impossible differential forward and backward to attack a block cipher I Guess subkeys in Part I and Part II, if there is a pair meets ∆A and ∆G, then the subkey guess must be wrong P I A B F G II C Preliminaries Impossible Differential Attacks on TEA and XTEA Impossible -
Of Ciphers and Neurons Detecting the Type of Ciphers Using Artificial Neural Networks
Of Ciphers and Neurons Detecting the Type of Ciphers Using Artificial Neural Networks Nils Kopal University of Siegen, Germany [email protected] Abstract cuits). ANNs found usages in a broad set of dif- ferent applications and research fields. Their main There are many (historical) unsolved ci- purpose is fast filtering, classifying, and process- phertexts from which we don’t know the ing of (mostly) non-linear data, e.g. image pro- type of cipher which was used to encrypt cessing, speech recognition, and language trans- these. A first step each cryptanalyst does lation. Besides that, scientists were also able to is to try to identify their cipher types us- “teach” ANNs to play games or to create paintings ing different (statistical) methods. This in the style of famous artists. can be difficult, since a multitude of ci- Inspired by the vast growth of ANNs, also cryp- pher types exist. To help cryptanalysts, tologists started to use them for different crypto- we developed a first version of an artifi- graphic and cryptanalytic problems. Examples are cial neural network that is right now able the learning of complex cryptographic algorithms, to differentiate between five classical ci- e.g. the Enigma machine, or the detection of the phers: simple monoalphabetic substitu- type of cipher used for encrypting a specific ci- tion, Vigenere,` Playfair, Hill, and transpo- phertext. sition. The network is based on Google’s In late 2019 Stamp published a challenge on the TensorFlow library as well as Keras. This MysteryTwister C3 (MTC3) website called “Ci- paper presents the current progress in the pher ID”. -
Polish Mathematicians Finding Patterns in Enigma Messages
Fall 2006 Chris Christensen MAT/CSC 483 Machine Ciphers Polyalphabetic ciphers are good ways to destroy the usefulness of frequency analysis. Implementation can be a problem, however. The key to a polyalphabetic cipher specifies the order of the ciphers that will be used during encryption. Ideally there would be as many ciphers as there are letters in the plaintext message and the ordering of the ciphers would be random – an one-time pad. More commonly, some rotation among a small number of ciphers is prescribed. But, rotating among a small number of ciphers leads to a period, which a cryptanalyst can exploit. Rotating among a “large” number of ciphers might work, but that is hard to do by hand – there is a high probability of encryption errors. Maybe, a machine. During World War II, all the Allied and Axis countries used machine ciphers. The United States had SIGABA, Britain had TypeX, Japan had “Purple,” and Germany (and Italy) had Enigma. SIGABA http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/SIGABA 1 A TypeX machine at Bletchley Park. 2 From the 1920s until the 1970s, cryptology was dominated by machine ciphers. What the machine ciphers typically did was provide a mechanical way to rotate among a large number of ciphers. The rotation was not random, but the large number of ciphers that were available could prevent depth from occurring within messages and (if the machines were used properly) among messages. We will examine Enigma, which was broken by Polish mathematicians in the 1930s and by the British during World War II. The Japanese Purple machine, which was used to transmit diplomatic messages, was broken by William Friedman’s cryptanalysts. -
Partly-Pseudo-Linear Cryptanalysis of Reduced-Round SPECK
cryptography Article Partly-Pseudo-Linear Cryptanalysis of Reduced-Round SPECK Sarah A. Alzakari * and Poorvi L. Vora Department of Computer Science, The George Washington University, 800 22nd St. NW, Washington, DC 20052, USA; [email protected] * Correspondence: [email protected] Abstract: We apply McKay’s pseudo-linear approximation of addition modular 2n to lightweight ARX block ciphers with large words, specifically the SPECK family. We demonstrate that a pseudo- linear approximation can be combined with a linear approximation using the meet-in-the-middle attack technique to recover several key bits. Thus we illustrate improvements to SPECK linear distinguishers based solely on Cho–Pieprzyk approximations by combining them with pseudo-linear approximations, and propose key recovery attacks. Keywords: SPECK; pseudo-linear cryptanalysis; linear cryptanalysis; partly-pseudo-linear attack 1. Introduction ARX block ciphers—which rely on Addition-Rotation-XOR operations performed a number of times—provide a common approach to lightweight cipher design. In June 2013, a group of inventors from the US’s National Security Agency (NSA) proposed two families of lightweight block ciphers, SIMON and SPECK—each of which comes in a variety of widths and key sizes. The SPECK cipher, as an ARX cipher, provides efficient software implementations, while SIMON provides efficient hardware implementations. Moreover, both families perform well in both hardware and software and offer the flexibility across Citation: Alzakari, S.; Vora, P. different platforms that will be required by future applications [1,2]. In this paper, we focus Partly-Pseudo-Linear Cryptanalysis on the SPECK family as an example lightweight ARX block cipher to illustrate our attack. -
A Hybrid Cryptosystem Based on Vigenère Cipher and Columnar Transposition Cipher
International Journal of Advanced Technology & Engineering Research (IJATER) www.ijater.com A HYBRID CRYPTOSYSTEM BASED ON VIGENÈRE CIPHER AND COLUMNAR TRANSPOSITION CIPHER Quist-Aphetsi Kester, MIEEE, Lecturer Faculty of Informatics, Ghana Technology University College, PMB 100 Accra North, Ghana Phone Contact +233 209822141 Email: [email protected] / [email protected] graphy that use the same cryptographic keys for both en- Abstract cryption of plaintext and decryption of cipher text. The keys may be identical or there may be a simple transformation to Privacy is one of the key issues addressed by information go between the two keys. The keys, in practice, represent a Security. Through cryptographic encryption methods, one shared secret between two or more parties that can be used can prevent a third party from understanding transmitted raw to maintain a private information link [5]. This requirement data over unsecured channel during signal transmission. The that both parties have access to the secret key is one of the cryptographic methods for enhancing the security of digital main drawbacks of symmetric key encryption, in compari- contents have gained high significance in the current era. son to public-key encryption. Typical examples symmetric Breach of security and misuse of confidential information algorithms are Advanced Encryption Standard (AES), Blow- that has been intercepted by unauthorized parties are key fish, Tripple Data Encryption Standard (3DES) and Serpent problems that information security tries to solve. [6]. This paper sets out to contribute to the general body of Asymmetric or Public key encryption on the other hand is an knowledge in the area of classical cryptography by develop- encryption method where a message encrypted with a reci- ing a new hybrid way of encryption of plaintext. -
Applying Differential Cryptanalysis for XTEA Using a Genetic Algorithm
Applying Differential Cryptanalysis for XTEA using a Genetic Algorithm Pablo Itaima and Mar´ıa Cristina Riffa aDepartment of Computer Science, Universidad Tecnica´ Federico Santa Mar´ıa, Casilla 110-V, Valpara´ıso, Chile, {pitaim,mcriff}@inf.utfsm.cl Keywords: Cryptanalysis, XTEA, Genetic Algorithms. Abstract. Differential Cryptanalysis is a well-known chosen plaintext attack on block ciphers. One of its components is a search procedure. In this paper we propose a genetic algorithm for this search procedure. We have applied our approach to the Extended Tiny Encryption Algorithm. We have obtained encouraging results for 4, 7 and 13 rounds. 1 Introduction In the Differential Cryptanalysis, Biham and Shamir (1991), we can identify many problems to be solved in order to complete a successful attack. The first problem is to define a differential characteristic, with a high probability, which will guide the attack. The second problem is to generate a set of plaintexts pairs, with a fixed difference, which follows the differential charac- teristic of the algorithm. Other problem is related to the search of the correct subkey during the partial deciphering process made during the attack. For this, many possible subkeys are tested and the algorithm selects the subkey that, most of the time, generates the best results. This is evaluated, in the corresponding round, by the number of plaintext pairs that have the same difference respect to the characteristic. Our aim is to improve this searching process using a ge- netic algorithm. Roughly speaking, the key idea is to quickly find a correct subkey, allowing at the same time to reduce the computational resources required. -
EVOLUTIONARY COMPUTATION in CRYPTANALYSIS of CLASSICAL CIPHERS 1. Introduction
Ø Ñ ÅØÑØÐ ÈÙ ÐØÓÒ× DOI: 10.1515/tmmp-2017-0026 Tatra Mt. Math. Publ. 70 (2017), 179–197 EVOLUTIONARY COMPUTATION IN CRYPTANALYSIS OF CLASSICAL CIPHERS Eugen Antal — Martin Elia´ˇs ABSTRACT. Evolutionary computation has represented a very popular way of problem solving in the recent years. This approach is also capable of effectively solving historical cipher in a fully automated way. This paper deals with empirical cryptanalysis of a monoalphabetic substitution using a genetic algorithm (GA) and a parallel genetic algorithm (PGA). The key ingredient of our contribution is the parameter analysis of GA and PGA. We focus on how these parameters affect the success rate of solving the monoalphabetic substitution. 1. Introduction Historical (also called classical) ciphers belong to historical part of cryptology. They had been used until the expansion of computers and modern cryptosys- tems. Under a classical cipher we can consider a standard cryptosystem based on commonly used definition [6]. Comparing the main properties of classical ciphers to modern cryptosystems (used nowadays) leads to major differences in their properties. Some selected differences [5] are: • The encryption algorithm of classical ciphers can be performed using paper and pencil (or some mechanical device) easily. • Classical ciphers are mostly used to encrypt text written in some natural language. • Classical ciphers are vulnerable to statistical analysis. c 2017 Mathematical Institute, Slovak Academy of Sciences. 2010 M a t h e m a t i c s Subject Classification: 94A60,68P25. K e y w o r d s: historical ciphers, grid, MPI, genetic algorithm, parallel genetic algorithm. This work was partially supported by grants VEGA 1/0159/17.