Jonathan Bootle
University College London
Network
Latest external collaboration on country level. Dive into details by clicking on the dots.
Publication
Featured researches published by Jonathan Bootle.
applied cryptography and network security | 2016
Jonathan Bootle; Andrea Cerulli; Pyrros Chaidos; Essam Ghadafi; Jens Groth
Group signatures are a central cryptographic primitive that has received a considerable amount of attention from the cryptographic community. They allow members of a group to anonymously sign on behalf of the group. Membership is overseen by a designated group manager. There is also a tracing authority that can revoke anonymity by revealing the identity of the signer if and when needed, to enforce accountability and deter abuse. For the primitive to be applicable in practice, it needs to support fully dynamic groups, i.e. users can join and leave at any time. In this work we take a close look at existing security definitions for fully dynamic group signatures. We identify a number of shortcomings in existing security definitions and fill the gap by providing a formal rigorous security model for the primitive. Our model is general and is not tailored towards a specific design paradigm and can therefore, as we show, be used to argue about the security of different existing constructions following different design paradigms. Our definitions are stringent and when possible incorporate protection against maliciously chosen keys. In the process, we identify a subtle issue inherent to one design paradigm, where new members might try to implicate older ones by means of back-dated signatures. This is not captured by existing models. We propose some inexpensive fixes for some existing constructions to avoid the issue.
european symposium on research in computer security | 2015
Jonathan Bootle; Andrea Cerulli; Pyrros Chaidos; Essam Ghadafi; Jens Groth; Christophe Petit
Ring signatures and group signatures are prominent cryptographic primitives offering a combination of privacy and authentication. They enable individual users to anonymously sign messages on behalf of a group of users. In ring signatures, the group, i.e. the ring, is chosen in an ad hoc manner by the signer. In group signatures, group membership is controlled by a group manager. Group signatures additionally enforce accountability by providing the group manager with a secret tracing key that can be used to identify the otherwise anonymous signer when needed. Accountable ring signatures, introduced by Xu and Yung CARDIS 2004, bridge the gap between the two notions. They provide maximal flexibility in choosing the ring, and at the same time maintain accountability by supporting a designated opener that can identify signers when needed. We revisit accountable ring signatures and offer a formal security model for the primitive. Our model offers strong security definitions incorporating protection against maliciously chosen keys and at the same time flexibility both in the choice of the ring and the opener. We give a generic construction using standard tools. We give a highly efficient instantiation of our generic construction in the random oracle model by meticulously combining Camenischs group signature scheme CRYPTO 1997 with a generalization of the one-out-of-many proofs of knowledge by Groth and Kohlweiss EUROCRYPT 2015. Our instantiation yields signatures of logarithmic size in the size of the ring while relying solely on the well-studied decisional Diffie-Hellman assumption. In the process, we offer a number of optimizations for the recent Groth and Kohlweiss one-out-of-many proofs, which may be useful for other applications. Accountable ring signatures imply traditional ring and group signatures. We therefore also obtain highly efficient instantiations of those primitives with signatures shorter than all existing ring signatures as well as existing group signatures relying on standard assumptions.
international cryptology conference | 2016
Jonathan Bootle; Andrea Cerulli; Pyrros Chaidos; Jens Groth; Christophe Petit
We provide a zero-knowledge argument for arithmetic circuit satisfiability with a communication complexity that grows logarithmically in the size of the circuit. The round complexity is also logarithmic and for an arithmetic circuit with fan-in 2 gates the computation of the prover and verifier is linear in the size of the circuit. The soundness of our argument relies solely on the well-established discrete logarithm assumption in prime order groups. At the heart of our new argument system is an efficient zero-knowledge argument of knowledge of openings of two Pedersen multicommitments satisfying an inner product relation, which is of independent interest. The inner product argument requires logarithmic communication, logarithmic interaction and linear computation for both the prover and the verifier. We also develop a scheme to commit to a polynomial and later reveal the evaluation at an arbitrary point, in a verifiable manner. This is used to build an optimized version of the constant round square root complexity argument of Groth CRYPTO 2009, which reduces both communication and round complexity.
international conference on the theory and application of cryptology and information security | 2017
Jonathan Bootle; Andrea Cerulli; Essam Ghadafi; Jens Groth; Mohammad Hajiabadi; Sune K. Jakobsen
We give computationally efficient zero-knowledge proofs of knowledge for arithmetic circuit satisfiability over a large field. For a circuit with N addition and multiplication gates, the prover only uses O(N) multiplications and the verifier only uses O(N) additions in the field. If the commitments we use are statistically binding, our zero-knowledge proofs have unconditional soundness, while if the commitments are statistically hiding we get computational soundness. Our zero-knowledge proofs also have sub-linear communication if the commitment scheme is compact. Our construction proceeds in three steps. First, we give a zero-knowledge proof for arithmetic circuit satisfiability in an ideal linear commitment model where the prover may commit to secret vectors of field elements, and the verifier can receive certified linear combinations of those vectors. Second, we show that the ideal linear commitment proof can be instantiated using error-correcting codes and non-interactive commitments. Finally, by choosing efficient instantiations of the primitives we obtain linear-time zero-knowledge proofs.
the cryptographers’ track at the rsa conference | 2018
Jonathan Bootle; Mehdi Tibouchi; Keita Xagawa
As an invited speaker of the ACISP 2017 conference, Dongxi Liu recently introduced a new lattice-based encryption scheme (joint work with Li, Kim and Nepal) designed for lightweight IoT applications. The new scheme, which has been submitted to the NIST post-quantum competition, is based on a variant of standard LWE called Compact-LWE, but is claimed to achieve high security levels in considerably smaller dimensions than usual lattice-based schemes. In fact, the proposed parameters, allegedly suitable for 138-bit security, involve the Compact-LWE assumption in dimension only 13.
public key cryptography | 2018
Jonathan Bootle; Jens Groth
Bootle et al. (EUROCRYPT 2016) construct an extremely efficient zero-knowledge argument for arithmetic circuit satisfiability in the discrete logarithm setting. However, the argument does not treat relations involving commitments, and furthermore, for simple polynomial relations, the complex machinery employed is unnecessary.
international cryptology conference | 2018
Carsten Baum; Jonathan Bootle; Andrea Cerulli; Rafael del Pino; Jens Groth; Vadim Lyubashevsky
We propose the first zero-knowledge argument with sub-linear communication complexity for arithmetic circuit satisfiability over a prime \({p}\) whose security is based on the hardness of the short integer solution (SIS) problem. For a circuit with \({N}\) gates, the communication complexity of our protocol is \(O\left( \sqrt{{N}{\lambda }\log ^3{{N}}}\right) \), where \({\lambda }\) is the security parameter. A key component of our construction is a surprisingly simple zero-knowledge proof for pre-images of linear relations whose amortized communication complexity depends only logarithmically on the number of relations being proved. This latter protocol is a substantial improvement, both theoretically and in practice, over the previous results in this line of research of Damgard et al. (CRYPTO 2012), Baum et al. (CRYPTO 2016), Cramer et al. (EUROCRYPT 2017) and del Pino and Lyubashevsky (CRYPTO 2017), and we believe it to be of independent interest.
Archive | 2018
Jonathan Bootle; Claire Delaplace; Thomas Espitau; Pierre-Alain Fouque; Mehdi Tibouchi
This paper is devoted to analyzing the variant of Regev’s learning with errors (LWE) problem in which modular reduction is omitted: namely, the problem (ILWE) of recovering a vector \(\mathbf {s}\in \mathbb {Z}^n\) given polynomially many samples of the form \((\mathbf {a},\langle \mathbf {a},\mathbf {s}\rangle + e)\in \mathbb {Z}^{n+1}\) where \(\mathbf { a}\) and e follow fixed distributions. Unsurprisingly, this problem is much easier than LWE: under mild conditions on the distributions, we show that the problem can be solved efficiently as long as the variance of e is not superpolynomially larger than that of \(\mathbf { a}\). We also provide almost tight bounds on the number of samples needed to recover \(\mathbf {s}\).
Tutorial Lectures on Foundations of Security Analysis and Design VIII - Volume 9808 | 2016
Jonathan Bootle; Andrea Cerulli; Pyrros Chaidos; Jens Groth
A proof system can be used by a prover to demonstrate to one or more verifiers that a statement is true. Proof systems can be interactive where the prover and verifier exchange many messages, or non-interactive where the prover sends a single convincing proof to the verifier. Proof systems are widely used in cryptographic protocols to verify that a party is following a protocol correctly and is not cheating. A particular type of proof systems are zero-knowledge proof systems, where the prover convinces the verifier that the statement is true but does not leak any other information. Zero-knowledge proofs are useful when the prover has private data that should not be leaked but needs to demonstrate a certain fact about this data. The prover may for instance want to show it is following a protocol correctly but not want to reveal its own input. In these lecture notes we give an overview of some central techniques behind the construction of efficient zero-knowledge proofs.
ieee symposium on security and privacy | 2018
Benedikt Bünz; Jonathan Bootle; Dan Boneh; Andrew Poelstra; Pieter Wuille; Greg Maxwell