Limits on the provable consequences of one-way permutations

41Citations
Citations of this article
68Readers
Mendeley users who have this article in their library.

This article is free to access.

Abstract

We present strong evidence that the implication, '‘if one-way permutations exist, then secure secret key agreement is possible’ is not provable by standard techniques. Since both sides of this implication are widely believed true in real life, to show that the implication is false requires a new model. We consider a world where all parties have access to a black box for a randomly selected permutation. Being totally random, this permutation will be strongly oneway in a provable, information-theoretic way. We show that, if P = NP, no protocol for secret key agreement is secure in such a setting. Thus, to prove that a secret key agreement protocol which uses a one-way permutation as a black box is secure is as hard as proving P ≠ NP. We also obtain, as a corollary, that there is an oracle relative to which the implication is false, i.e., there is a one-way permutation, yet secret-exchange is impossible. Thus, no technique which relativizes can prove that secret exchange can be based on any one-way permutation. Our results present a general framework for proving statements of the form, '‘Cryptographic application A’ is not likely possible based solely on complexity assumption Y.''.

Cite

CITATION STYLE

APA

Impagliazzo, R., & Rudich, S. (1990). Limits on the provable consequences of one-way permutations. In Lecture Notes in Computer Science (including subseries Lecture Notes in Artificial Intelligence and Lecture Notes in Bioinformatics) (Vol. 403 LNCS, pp. 9–26). Springer Verlag. https://doi.org/10.1007/0-387-34799-2_2

Register to see more suggestions

Mendeley helps you to discover research relevant for your work.

Already have an account?

Save time finding and organizing research with Mendeley

Sign up for free