Primitives and Schemes for Non-Atomic Information Authentication Goce Jakimoski
Total Page:16
File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb
Florida State University Libraries Electronic Theses, Treatises and Dissertations The Graduate School 2006 Primitives and Schemes for Non-Atomic Information Authentication Goce Jakimoski Follow this and additional works at the FSU Digital Library. For more information, please contact [email protected] THE FLORIDA STATE UNIVERSITY COLLEGE OF ARTS AND SCIENCES PRIMITIVES AND SCHEMES FOR NON-ATOMIC INFORMATION AUTHENTICATION By GOCE JAKIMOSKI A Dissertation submitted to the Department of Computer Science in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of Doctor of Philosophy Degree Awarded: Spring Semester, 2006 The members of the Committee approve the Dissertation of Goce Jakimoski defended on March 30, 2006. Mike Burmester Professor Directing Dissertation Yvo Desmedt Professor Co-Directing Dissertation Mark Van Hoeij Outside Committee Member Kyle Gallivan Committee Member Michael Mascagni Committee Member The Office of Graduate Studies has verified and approved the above named committee members. ii ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS The completion of the dissertation would not have been possible without the support of my family that has blessed my life in ways I cannot repay. I wish to recognize, with profound appreciation, the invaluable academic mentoring I received from my advisors: Professor Yvo Desmedt and Professor Mike Burmester. In addition to my advisors, my sincere thanks are due to the members of my advisory committee, Dr. Mark Van Hoeij, Dr. Kyle Gallivan and Dr. Michael Mascagni, whose guidance and encouragement contributed to the completion of this work. I would also like to thank the Department of Computer Science for giving me an opportunity and providing an environment where I can study and conduct my research. My final thanks goes to the National Science Foundation (NSF) for the financial help through a number of grants awarded to my academic advisors. — Goce iii TABLE OF CONTENTS List of Tables ........................................... vi List of Figures .......................................... vii Abstract ............................................. ix 1. Introduction ......................................... 1 1.1 Background ....................................... 1 1.2 Organization of the dissertation and our contributions ............... 19 1.3 Further reading ..................................... 20 2. Erasure-tolerant Information Authentication ....................... 23 2.1 The setting ....................................... 23 2.2 Lower bounds on the deception probability ..................... 25 2.3 Distance properties ................................... 28 2.4 Concatenation and composition of η-codes ...................... 30 2.5 η-codes with minimal impersonation and substitution probabilities ........ 33 2.6 η-codes from set systems ............................... 34 2.7 η-codes from Reed-Solomon codes .......................... 39 3. Proven Secure Stream Authentication in a Point-to-point Setting ............ 42 3.1 Unforgeable Stream Authentication ......................... 42 3.2 Some Practical Schemes ................................ 45 3.3 A family of schemes .................................. 49 3.4 Security Analysis .................................... 54 4. Proven Secure Multicast Stream Authentication ..................... 69 4.1 Insecure TESLA constructions from secure components .............. 69 4.2 Sufficient assumptions about the components of TESLA .............. 74 4.3 Secure TESLA implementation via a CKDA-secure pseudorandom permutation . 77 4.4 Secure TESLA implementation via erasure-tolerant authentication codes ..... 80 5. Related-Key Differential Cryptanalysis of AES ...................... 83 5.1 Related-key differential attacks ............................ 83 5.2 Related-Key Differential Attacks on AES-192 .................... 84 5.3 Is the Markov Cipher property sufficient? ...................... 90 REFERENCES ......................................... 96 iv BIOGRAPHICAL SKETCH ..................................104 v LIST OF TABLES 1.1 AES S-box: the substitution values of the byte xy ................... 4 1.2 An example of a binary A-code with secrecy ....................... 9 2.1 An example of a binary η-code with secrecy ....................... 25 2.2 Using (v2, v(v 1), v 1)-covering vs Authentication of each packet separately . 36 − − 2.3 Comparison of an η-code from RS code with the current practices .......... 41 5.1 Propagation of the key difference (0000)(0000)(0∆00)(0∆00)(0000)(0000) ...... 85 5.2 Possible propagation of the plaintext difference ..................... 85 5.3 Propagation of the key difference (0000)(0000)(∆000)(∆000)(0000)(0000) ...... 87 5.4 Impossible related-key differential attacks vs Partial sums attacks on AES-192 . 90 vi LIST OF FIGURES 1.1 Pseudocode for AES encryption .............................. 2 1.2 Pseudocode for the key expansion ............................. 3 1.3 OMAC (l = 3) ....................................... 14 1.4 The basic stream authentication scheme ......................... 17 1.5 TESLA Scheme II: Tolerating packet loss ........................ 18 2.1 Erasure-tolerant authentication using cover-free families ................ 37 2.2 (1, 1)-cover-free family ................................... 38 2.3 Efficient computation ................................... 40 3.1 SN-MAC .......................................... 45 3.2 A tree-based description of the computation of MAC(Di) in SN-MAC ........ 46 3.3 ReMAC; PSi = M . Mi. ............................... 47 1|| || 3.4 A tree-based description of the computation of authentication tags in ReMAC . 47 3.5 MACC ............................................ 48 3.6 A tree-based description of the computation of authentication tags in MACC . 48 3.7 An example of a 4C stream authentication tree ..................... 50 3.8 Possible structures when the stream consists of one, two or three chunks ...... 60 3.9 Constructing a forgery when 4 and 6 have same color .................. 61 3.10 Practical stream authentication schemes ......................... 67 4.1 Permuted-input OMAC .................................. 70 4.2 Insecure TESLA implementation. MACs are computed using POMAC. ....... 71 vii 4.3 The function F leaks the encryption of zero E ′ (0). .................. 73 Ki 4.4 TESLA implementation using a block cipher resistant to related-key cryptanalysis . 79 4.5 Multicast stream authentication: a) The basic scheme, b) Using (1, 1)-CFF ..... 81 4.6 A variant of the basic stream authentication scheme. .................. 81 viii ABSTRACT The digital revolution, fired by the development of the information and communication technologies, has fundamentally changed the way we think, behave, communicate, work and earn livelihood (the World Summit on the Information Society). These technologies have affected all aspects of our society and economy. However, the Information Society developments present us not only with new benefits and opportunities, but also with new challenges. Information security is one of these challenges, and nowadays, information security mechanisms are inevitable components of virtually every information system. Information authentication is one of the basic information security goals, and it addresses the issues of source corroboration and improper or unauthorized modification of data. More specific, data integrity is the property that the data has not been changed in an unauthorized manner since its creation, transmission or storage. Data origin authentication, or message authentication, is the property whereby a party can be corroborated as a source of the data. Usually, message authentication is achieved by appending an authentication tag or a digital signature to the message. The authentication tag (resp., digital signature) is computed in such a way so that only an entity that is in possession of the secret key can produce it, and it is used by the verifier to determine the authenticity of the message. During this procedure, the message is considered to be an atomic object in the following sense. The verifier needs the complete message in order to check its validity. Presented with the authentication tag (resp., digital signature) and an incomplete message, the verifier cannot determine whether the presented incomplete message is authentic or not. We consider a more general authentication model, where the verifier is able to check the validity of incomplete messages. In particular, we analyze the cases of erasure-tolerant information authentication and stream authentication. ix Our model of erasure-tolerant information authentication assumes that a limited number of the message “letters” can be lost during the transmission. Nevertheless, the verifier should still be able to check the authenticity of the received incomplete message. We provide answers to several fundamental questions in this model (e.g., lower bounds on the deception probability, distance properties, optimal constructions, etc.), and we propose some constructions of erasure-tolerant authentication codes. Streams of data are bit sequences of a finite, but a priori unknown length that a sender sends to one or more recipients, and they occur naturally when on-line processing is required. In this case, the receiver should be able to verify the authenticity of a prefix of the stream, that is, the part of the stream that has been received so far. We provide efficient and proven secure schemes for both unicast and multicast stream authentication. The security proof of one of the proposed multicast stream authentication schemes assumes