Document Open Access Logo

Improved Rate for Non-Malleable Codes and Time-Lock Puzzles

Authors Cody Freitag , Ilan Komargodski , Manu Kondapaneni , Jad Silbak

PDF

File

Thumbnail PDF
PDF
LIPIcs.ITCS.2026.62.pdf
  • Filesize: 0.89 MB
  • 24 pages

Document Identifiers

Subject Classification

ACM Subject Classification
  • Theory of computation → Computational complexity and cryptography
Keywords
  • Non-malleable codes
  • Time-lock puzzles

Metrics

Abstract

Non-malleable codes allow a sender to transmit a message to a receiver, while providing a "best-possible" integrity guarantee to ensure that no attacker - who cannot already decode the message - can meaningfully tamper the message in transit. If tampered, the received message should either be invalid or unrelated to the original message. Non-malleable time-lock puzzles (TLPs) are a special case of non-malleable codes for bounded polynomial-depth tampering with very efficient encoding.
In this work, we give generic techniques for constructing non-malleable codes and non-malleable TLPs with improved rate, which captures the ratio of a message’s length to its encoding length. 
A key contribution of our work is identifying a security notion for non-malleability, which we term "CCA-hiding", sufficient for our compilers. CCA-hiding is a relaxation of CCA-security for encryption or commitments to the fine-grained setting of codes, and requires that the encoded message remains hidden, even given a decoding oracle for any other codeword. Intriguingly, CCA-hiding does not imply non-malleability in the fine-grained setting, as is the case for encryption and commitments. 
Using our new techniques, we give the following constructions:  
- Rate-1 CCA-hiding TLPs in the plain model. 
- Rate-1 non-malleable codes for bounded polynomial-depth tampering in the auxiliary-input random oracle model (AI-ROM). 
- Rate-(1/2) non-malleable TLPs in the AI-ROM.

Cite As Get BibTex

Cody Freitag, Ilan Komargodski, Manu Kondapaneni, and Jad Silbak. Improved Rate for Non-Malleable Codes and Time-Lock Puzzles. In 17th Innovations in Theoretical Computer Science Conference (ITCS 2026). Leibniz International Proceedings in Informatics (LIPIcs), Volume 362, pp. 62:1-62:24, Schloss Dagstuhl – Leibniz-Zentrum für Informatik (2026) https://doi.org/10.4230/LIPIcs.ITCS.2026.62

Author Details

Cody Freitag
  • Northeastern University, Boston, MA, USA
  • Hebrew University of Jerusalem, Israel
Ilan Komargodski
  • Hebrew University of Jerusalem, Israel
Manu Kondapaneni
  • Northeastern University, Boston, MS, USA
Jad Silbak
  • Massachusetts Institute of Technology, Boston, MA, USA

Funding

  • Freitag, Cody: Supported in part by a Khoury College Distinguished Postdoctoral Fellowship and the European Union (ERC, SCALE, 101162665). Views and opinions expressed are however those of the author(s) only and do not necessarily reflect those of the European Union or the European Research Council. Neither the European Union nor the granting authority can be held responsible for them.
  • Komargodski, Ilan: Supported in part by the European Union (ERC, SCALE, 101162665). Views and opinions expressed are however those of the author(s) only and do not necessarily reflect those of the European Union or the European Research Council. Neither the European Union nor the granting authority can be held responsible for them.
  • Silbak, Jad: Supported in part by a Khoury College Distinguished Postdoctoral Fellowship. Part of this work was done while the author was a postdoctoral research fellow at the Simons Institute for the Theory of Computing (research supported in part by a grant from the UC Noyce Initiative to the Simons Institute for the Theory of Computing.)

Acknowledgements

We thank Jesko Dujmovic for helpful discussion on the paper and for first pointing out the uninstantiability result for our construction in the random oracle model.

References

  1. Blockchain data storage. https://ethereum.org/en/developers/docs/data-availability/blockchain-data-storage-strategies/#storage. Accessed: 2025-02-11.
  2. Divesh Aggarwal, Shashank Agrawal, Divya Gupta, Hemanta K. Maji, Omkant Pandey, and Manoj Prabhakaran. Optimal computational split-state non-malleable codes. In Theory of Cryptography - 13th International Conference, TCC, pages 393-417, 2016. URL: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-662-49099-0_15.
  3. Divesh Aggarwal, Yevgeniy Dodis, Tomasz Kazana, and Maciej Obremski. Non-malleable reductions and applications. In Proceedings of the Forty-Seventh Annual ACM on Symposium on Theory of Computing, STOC, pages 459-468, 2015. URL: https://doi.org/10.1145/2746539.2746544.
  4. Divesh Aggarwal, Yevgeniy Dodis, and Shachar Lovett. Non-malleable codes from additive combinatorics. SIAM J. Comput., 47(2):524-546, 2018. URL: https://doi.org/10.1137/140985251.
  5. Divesh Aggarwal, Bhavana Kanukurthi, Sai Lakshmi Bhavana Obbattu, Maciej Obremski, and Sruthi Sekar. Rate one-third non-malleable codes. In Stefano Leonardi and Anupam Gupta, editors, STOC '22: 54th Annual ACM SIGACT Symposium on Theory of Computing, Rome, Italy, June 20 - 24, 2022, pages 1364-1377. ACM, 2022. URL: https://doi.org/10.1145/3519935.3519972.
  6. Shashank Agrawal, Divya Gupta, Hemanta K. Maji, Omkant Pandey, and Manoj Prabhakaran. A rate-optimizing compiler for non-malleable codes against bit-wise tampering and permutations. In Yevgeniy Dodis and Jesper Buus Nielsen, editors, Theory of Cryptography - 12th Theory of Cryptography Conference, TCC 2015, Warsaw, Poland, March 23-25, 2015, Proceedings, Part I, volume 9014 of Lecture Notes in Computer Science, pages 375-397. Springer, 2015. URL: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-662-46494-6_16.
  7. Knud Ahrens. SIGNITC: supersingular isogeny graph non-interactive timed commitments. IACR Cryptol. ePrint Arch., page 1225, 2024. URL: https://eprint.iacr.org/2024/1225.
  8. Andreea B. Alexandru, Julian Loss, Charalampos Papamanthou, Giorgos Tsimos, and Benedikt Wagner. Sublinear-round broadcast without trusted setup. IACR Cryptol. ePrint Arch., page 770, 2024. URL: https://eprint.iacr.org/2024/770.
  9. Marshall Ball, Eshan Chattopadhyay, Jyun-Jie Liao, Tal Malkin, and Li-Yang Tan. Non-malleability against polynomial tampering. In CRYPTO (3), volume 12172 of Lecture Notes in Computer Science, pages 97-126. Springer, 2020. URL: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-56877-1_4.
  10. Marshall Ball, Dana Dachman-Soled, Siyao Guo, Tal Malkin, and Li-Yang Tan. Non-malleable codes for small-depth circuits. In 59th IEEE Annual Symposium on Foundations of Computer Science, FOCS, pages 826-837, 2018. URL: https://doi.org/10.1109/FOCS.2018.00083.
  11. Marshall Ball, Dana Dachman-Soled, Mukul Kulkarni, Huijia Lin, and Tal Malkin. Non-malleable codes against bounded polynomial time tampering. In Advances in Cryptology - EUROCRYPT, pages 501-530, 2019. URL: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-17653-2_17.
  12. Marshall Ball, Dana Dachman-Soled, Mukul Kulkarni, and Tal Malkin. Non-malleable codes for bounded depth, bounded fan-in circuits. In Advances in Cryptology - EUROCRYPT, pages 881-908, 2016. URL: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-662-49896-5_31.
  13. Marshall Ball, Dana Dachman-Soled, Mukul Kulkarni, and Tal Malkin. Non-malleable codes for bounded depth, bounded fan-in circuits. In Marc Fischlin and Jean-Sébastien Coron, editors, Advances in Cryptology - EUROCRYPT 2016 - 35th Annual International Conference on the Theory and Applications of Cryptographic Techniques, Vienna, Austria, May 8-12, 2016, Proceedings, Part II, volume 9666 of Lecture Notes in Computer Science, pages 881-908. Springer, 2016. URL: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-662-49896-5_31.
  14. Marshall Ball, Dana Dachman-Soled, Mukul Kulkarni, and Tal Malkin. Non-malleable codes from average-case hardness: AC⁰, decision trees, and streaming space-bounded tampering. In Advances in Cryptology - EUROCRYPT, pages 618-650, 2018. Google Scholar
  15. Marshall Ball, Dana Dachman-Soled, and Julian Loss. (nondeterministic) hardness vs. non-malleability. In CRYPTO (1), volume 13507 of Lecture Notes in Computer Science, pages 148-177. Springer, 2022. URL: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-031-15802-5_6.
  16. Marshall Ball, Siyao Guo, and Daniel Wichs. Non-malleable codes for decision trees. In Advances in Cryptology - CRYPTO, pages 413-434, 2019. URL: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-26948-7_15.
  17. Marshall Ball, Ronen Shaltiel, and Jad Silbak. Non-malleable codes with optimal rate for poly-size circuits. In EUROCRYPT (4), volume 14654 of Lecture Notes in Computer Science, pages 33-54. Springer, 2024. URL: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-031-58737-5_2.
  18. Boaz Barak. How to go beyond the black-box simulation barrier. In 42nd Annual Symposium on Foundations of Computer Science, FOCS, pages 106-115, 2001. URL: https://doi.org/10.1109/SFCS.2001.959885.
  19. Boaz Barak. Constant-round coin-tossing with a man in the middle or realizing the shared random string model. In 43rd Symposium on Foundations of Computer Science FOCS, pages 345-355, 2002. URL: https://doi.org/10.1109/SFCS.2002.1181957.
  20. James Bartusek, Liron Bronfman, Justin Holmgren, Fermi Ma, and Ron D. Rothblum. On the (in)security of kilian-based snargs. In TCC (2), volume 11892 of Lecture Notes in Computer Science, pages 522-551. Springer, 2019. URL: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-36033-7_20.
  21. Carsten Baum, Bernardo David, Rafael Dowsley, Jesper Buus Nielsen, and Sabine Oechsner. TARDIS: A foundation of time-lock puzzles in UC. In EUROCRYPT (3), volume 12698 of Lecture Notes in Computer Science, pages 429-459. Springer, 2021. URL: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-77883-5_15.
  22. Nir Bitansky and Huijia Lin. One-message zero knowledge and non-malleable commitments. In Theory of Cryptography - 16th International Conference, TCC, pages 209-234, 2018. URL: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-03807-6_8.
  23. Dan Boneh and Moni Naor. Timed commitments. In CRYPTO, volume 1880 of Lecture Notes in Computer Science, pages 236-254. Springer, 2000. URL: https://doi.org/10.1007/3-540-44598-6_15.
  24. Zvika Brakerski, Shai Halevi, and Antigoni Polychroniadou. Four round secure computation without setup. In TCC (1), volume 10677 of Lecture Notes in Computer Science, pages 645-677. Springer, 2017. URL: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-70500-2_22.
  25. Christina Brzuska, Pooya Farshim, and Arno Mittelbach. Random-oracle uninstantiability from indistinguishability obfuscation. In TCC (2), volume 9015 of Lecture Notes in Computer Science, pages 428-455. Springer, 2015. URL: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-662-46497-7_17.
  26. Ran Canetti, Oded Goldreich, and Shai Halevi. The random oracle methodology, revisited (preliminary version). In STOC, pages 209-218. ACM, 1998. URL: https://doi.org/10.1145/276698.276741.
  27. Ran Canetti, Huijia Lin, and Rafael Pass. Adaptive hardness and composable security in the plain model from standard assumptions. In FOCS, pages 541-550. IEEE Computer Society, 2010. URL: https://doi.org/10.1109/FOCS.2010.86.
  28. Eshan Chattopadhyay and Xin Li. Non-malleable codes and extractors for small-depth circuits, and affine functions. In Proceedings of the 49th Annual ACM SIGACT Symposium on Theory of Computing, STOC, pages 1171-1184, 2017. URL: https://doi.org/10.1145/3055399.3055483.
  29. Peter Chvojka and Tibor Jager. Simple, fast, efficient, and tightly-secure non-malleable non-interactive timed commitments. In Public Key Cryptography (1), volume 13940 of Lecture Notes in Computer Science, pages 500-529. Springer, 2023. URL: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-031-31368-4_18.
  30. Michele Ciampi, Rafail Ostrovsky, Luisa Siniscalchi, and Ivan Visconti. Concurrent non-malleable commitments (and more) in 3 rounds. In Advances in Cryptology - CRYPTO, pages 270-299, 2016. URL: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-662-53015-3_10.
  31. Michele Ciampi, Rafail Ostrovsky, Luisa Siniscalchi, and Ivan Visconti. Four-round concurrent non-malleable commitments from one-way functions. In Advances in Cryptology - CRYPTO, pages 127-157, 2017. URL: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-63715-0_5.
  32. Sandro Coretti, Antonio Faonio, and Daniele Venturi. Rate-optimizing compilers for continuously non-malleable codes. In ACNS, volume 11464 of Lecture Notes in Computer Science, pages 3-23. Springer, 2019. URL: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-21568-2_1.
  33. Dana Dachman-Soled, Ilan Komargodski, and Rafael Pass. Non-malleable codes for bounded parallel-time tampering. In Advances in Cryptology - CRYPTO, pages 535-565, 2021. URL: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-84252-9_18.
  34. Danny Dolev, Cynthia Dwork, and Moni Naor. Non-malleable cryptography (extended abstract). In Proceedings of the 23rd Annual ACM Symposium on Theory of Computing, STOC, pages 542-552, 1991. URL: https://doi.org/10.1145/103418.103474.
  35. Stefan Dziembowski, Krzysztof Pietrzak, and Daniel Wichs. Non-malleable codes. In Innovations in Computer Science - ICS, pages 434-452, 2010. URL: http://conference.iiis.tsinghua.edu.cn/ICS2010/content/papers/34.html.
  36. Karim Eldefrawy, Benjamin Terner, and Moti Yung. Composing timed cryptographic protocols: Foundations and applications. IACR Cryptol. ePrint Arch., page 676, 2024. URL: https://eprint.iacr.org/2024/676.
  37. Sebastian Faust, Kristina Hostáková, Pratyay Mukherjee, and Daniele Venturi. Non-malleable codes for space-bounded tampering. In Advances in Cryptology - CRYPTO, pages 95-126, 2017. URL: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-63715-0_4.
  38. Sebastian Faust, Pratyay Mukherjee, Daniele Venturi, and Daniel Wichs. Efficient non-malleable codes and key derivation for poly-size tampering circuits. IEEE Trans. Information Theory, 62(12):7179-7194, 2016. URL: https://doi.org/10.1109/TIT.2016.2613919.
  39. Amos Fiat and Adi Shamir. How to prove yourself: Practical solutions to identification and signature problems. In CRYPTO, volume 263 of Lecture Notes in Computer Science, pages 186-194. Springer, 1986. URL: https://doi.org/10.1007/3-540-47721-7_12.
  40. Cody Freitag, Ilan Komargodski, Rafael Pass, and Naomi Sirkin. Non-malleable time-lock puzzles and applications. In Theory of Cryptography - 19th International Conference, TCC, pages 447-479, 2021. URL: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-90456-2_15.
  41. Eiichiro Fujisaki and Tatsuaki Okamoto. Secure integration of asymmetric and symmetric encryption schemes. In Advances in Cryptology - CRYPTO, pages 537-554, 1999. URL: https://doi.org/10.1007/3-540-48405-1_34.
  42. Rachit Garg, Dakshita Khurana, George Lu, and Brent Waters. Black-box non-interactive non-malleable commitments. In EUROCRYPT (3), volume 12698 of Lecture Notes in Computer Science, pages 159-185. Springer, 2021. URL: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-77883-5_6.
  43. Rachit Garg, Dakshita Khurana, George Lu, and Brent Waters. On non-uniform security for black-box non-interactive CCA commitments. In EUROCRYPT (1), volume 14004 of Lecture Notes in Computer Science, pages 173-204. Springer, 2023. URL: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-031-30545-0_7.
  44. Shafi Goldwasser and Yael Tauman Kalai. On the (in)security of the fiat-shamir paradigm. In 44th Symposium on Foundations of Computer Science (FOCS 2003), pages 102-113, 2003. URL: https://doi.org/10.1109/SFCS.2003.1238185.
  45. Rishab Goyal, Venkata Koppula, and Brent Waters. Lockable obfuscation. In FOCS, pages 612-621. IEEE Computer Society, 2017. URL: https://doi.org/10.1109/FOCS.2017.62.
  46. Vipul Goyal. Constant round non-malleable protocols using one way functions. In Lance Fortnow and Salil P. Vadhan, editors, Proceedings of the 43rd ACM Symposium on Theory of Computing, STOC, pages 695-704, 2011. URL: https://doi.org/10.1145/1993636.1993729.
  47. Vipul Goyal, Chen-Kuei Lee, Rafail Ostrovsky, and Ivan Visconti. Constructing non-malleable commitments: A black-box approach. In 53rd Annual IEEE Symposium on Foundations of Computer Science, FOCS, pages 51-60, 2012. URL: https://doi.org/10.1109/FOCS.2012.47.
  48. Vipul Goyal, Huijia Lin, Omkant Pandey, Rafael Pass, and Amit Sahai. Round-efficient concurrently composable secure computation via a robust extraction lemma. In TCC (1), volume 9014 of Lecture Notes in Computer Science, pages 260-289. Springer, 2015. URL: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-662-46494-6_12.
  49. Vipul Goyal, Omkant Pandey, and Silas Richelson. Textbook non-malleable commitments. In Proceedings of the 48th Annual ACM SIGACT Symposium on Theory of Computing, STOC, pages 1128-1141, 2016. URL: https://doi.org/10.1145/2897518.2897657.
  50. Vipul Goyal and Silas Richelson. Non-malleable commitments using goldreich-levin list decoding. In FOCS, pages 686-699. IEEE Computer Society, 2019. URL: https://doi.org/10.1109/FOCS.2019.00047.
  51. Divya Gupta, Hemanta K. Maji, and Mingyuan Wang. Constant-rate non-malleable codes in the split-state model. IACR Cryptol. ePrint Arch., page 1048, 2017. URL: http://eprint.iacr.org/2017/1048.
  52. Divya Gupta, Hemanta K. Maji, and Mingyuan Wang. Explicit rate-1 non-malleable codes for local tampering. In Alexandra Boldyreva and Daniele Micciancio, editors, Advances in Cryptology - CRYPTO 2019 - 39th Annual International Cryptology Conference, Santa Barbara, CA, USA, August 18-22, 2019, Proceedings, Part I, volume 11692 of Lecture Notes in Computer Science, pages 435-466. Springer, 2019. URL: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-26948-7_16.
  53. Yael Tauman Kalai and Dakshita Khurana. Non-interactive non-malleability from quantum supremacy. In Advances in Cryptology - CRYPTO, pages 552-582, 2019. URL: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-26954-8_18.
  54. Bhavana Kanukurthi, Sai Lakshmi Bhavana Obbattu, and Sruthi Sekar. Four-state non-malleable codes with explicit constant rate. In Yael Kalai and Leonid Reyzin, editors, Theory of Cryptography - 15th International Conference, TCC 2017, Baltimore, MD, USA, November 12-15, 2017, Proceedings, Part II, volume 10678 of Lecture Notes in Computer Science, pages 344-375. Springer, 2017. URL: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-70503-3_11.
  55. Bhavana Kanukurthi, Sai Lakshmi Bhavana Obbattu, and Sruthi Sekar. Non-malleable randomness encoders and their applications. In Jesper Buus Nielsen and Vincent Rijmen, editors, Advances in Cryptology - EUROCRYPT 2018 - 37th Annual International Conference on the Theory and Applications of Cryptographic Techniques, Tel Aviv, Israel, April 29 - May 3, 2018 Proceedings, Part III, volume 10822 of Lecture Notes in Computer Science, pages 589-617. Springer, 2018. URL: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-78372-7_19.
  56. Jonathan Katz, Julian Loss, and Jiayu Xu. On the security of time-lock puzzles and timed commitments. In TCC (3), volume 12552 of Lecture Notes in Computer Science, pages 390-413. Springer, 2020. URL: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-64381-2_14.
  57. Dmitry Khovratovich, Ron D. Rothblum, and Lev Soukhanov. How to prove false statements: Practical attacks on fiat-shamir. In CRYPTO (6), volume 16005 of Lecture Notes in Computer Science, pages 3-26. Springer, 2025. URL: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-032-01887-8_1.
  58. Dakshita Khurana. Round optimal concurrent non-malleability from polynomial hardness. In Theory of Cryptography - 15th International Conference, TCC, pages 139-171, 2017. URL: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-70503-3_5.
  59. Dakshita Khurana. Non-interactive distributional indistinguishability (NIDI) and non-malleable commitments. In EUROCRYPT (3), volume 12698 of Lecture Notes in Computer Science, pages 186-215. Springer, 2021. URL: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-77883-5_7.
  60. Dakshita Khurana and Amit Sahai. How to achieve non-malleability in one or two rounds. In 58th IEEE Annual Symposium on Foundations of Computer Science, FOCS, pages 564-575, 2017. URL: https://doi.org/10.1109/FOCS.2017.58.
  61. Susumu Kiyoshima. Round-efficient black-box construction of composable multi-party computation. In CRYPTO (2), volume 8617 of Lecture Notes in Computer Science, pages 351-368. Springer, 2014. URL: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-662-44381-1_20.
  62. Huijia Lin and Rafael Pass. Non-malleability amplification. In Proceedings of the 41st Annual ACM Symposium on Theory of Computing, STOC, pages 189-198, 2009. URL: https://doi.org/10.1145/1536414.1536442.
  63. Huijia Lin and Rafael Pass. Constant-round non-malleable commitments from any one-way function. In Proceedings of the 43rd ACM Symposium on Theory of Computing, STOC, pages 705-714, 2011. URL: https://doi.org/10.1145/1993636.1993730.
  64. Huijia Lin and Rafael Pass. Black-box constructions of composable protocols without set-up. In CRYPTO, volume 7417 of Lecture Notes in Computer Science, pages 461-478. Springer, 2012. URL: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-642-32009-5_27.
  65. Huijia Lin, Rafael Pass, and Pratik Soni. Two-round and non-interactive concurrent non-malleable commitments from time-lock puzzles. In 58th IEEE Annual Symposium on Foundations of Computer Science, FOCS, pages 576-587. IEEE Computer Society, 2017. URL: https://doi.org/10.1109/FOCS.2017.59.
  66. Huijia Lin, Rafael Pass, and Muthuramakrishnan Venkitasubramaniam. Concurrent non-malleable commitments from any one-way function. In Theory of Cryptography, Fifth Theory of Cryptography Conference, TCC, pages 571-588, 2008. URL: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-540-78524-8_31.
  67. Feng-Hao Liu and Anna Lysyanskaya. Tamper and leakage resilience in the split-state model. In Advances in Cryptology - CRYPTO, pages 517-532, 2012. URL: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-642-32009-5_30.
  68. Mohammad Mahmoody, Tal Moran, and Salil P. Vadhan. Time-lock puzzles in the random oracle model. In CRYPTO, volume 6841 of Lecture Notes in Computer Science, pages 39-50. Springer, 2011. URL: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-642-22792-9_3.
  69. Giulio Malavolta and Sri Aravinda Krishnan Thyagarajan. Homomorphic time-lock puzzles and applications. In Advances in Cryptology - CRYPTO, pages 620-649, 2019. URL: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-26948-7_22.
  70. Moni Naor and Moti Yung. Public-key cryptosystems provably secure against chosen ciphertext attacks. In STOC, pages 427-437. ACM, 1990. URL: https://doi.org/10.1145/100216.100273.
  71. Omkant Pandey, Rafael Pass, and Vinod Vaikuntanathan. Adaptive one-way functions and applications. In Advances in Cryptology - CRYPTO, pages 57-74, 2008. URL: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-540-85174-5_4.
  72. Rafael Pass. Unprovable security of perfect NIZK and non-interactive non-malleable commitments. In TCC, volume 7785 of Lecture Notes in Computer Science, pages 334-354. Springer, 2013. URL: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-642-36594-2_19.
  73. Rafael Pass and Alon Rosen. Concurrent non-malleable commitments. In 46th Annual IEEE Symposium on Foundations of Computer Science (FOCS, pages 563-572, 2005. URL: https://doi.org/10.1109/SFCS.2005.27.
  74. Rafael Pass and Alon Rosen. New and improved constructions of non-malleable cryptographic protocols. In Proceedings of the 37th Annual ACM Symposium on Theory of Computing, STOC, pages 533-542, 2005. URL: https://doi.org/10.1145/1060590.1060670.
  75. Rafael Pass and Hoeteck Wee. Constant-round non-malleable commitments from sub-exponential one-way functions. In Advances in Cryptology - EUROCRYPT, 2010. Google Scholar
  76. Charles Rackoff and Daniel R. Simon. Non-interactive zero-knowledge proof of knowledge and chosen ciphertext attack. In CRYPTO, volume 576 of Lecture Notes in Computer Science, pages 433-444. Springer, 1991. URL: https://doi.org/10.1007/3-540-46766-1_35.
  77. Ronald L Rivest, Adi Shamir, and David A Wagner. Time-lock puzzles and timed-release crypto, 1996. Google Scholar
  78. Ronen Shaltiel and Jad Silbak. Explicit codes for poly-size circuits and functions that are hard to sample on low entropy distributions. In STOC, pages 2028-2038. ACM, 2024. URL: https://doi.org/10.1145/3618260.3649735.
  79. Sri Aravinda Krishnan Thyagarajan, Guilhem Castagnos, Fabien Laguillaumie, and Giulio Malavolta. Efficient CCA timed commitments in class groups. In CCS, pages 2663-2684. ACM, 2021. URL: https://doi.org/10.1145/3460120.3484773.
  80. Nirvan Tyagi, Arasu Arun, Cody Freitag, Riad Wahby, Joseph Bonneau, and David Mazières. Riggs: Decentralized sealed-bid auctions. In CCS, pages 1227-1241. ACM, 2023. URL: https://doi.org/10.1145/3576915.3623182.
  81. Dominique Unruh. Random oracles and auxiliary input. In Advances in Cryptology - CRYPTO 2007, 27th Annual International Cryptology Conference, Santa Barbara, CA, USA, August 19-23, 2007, Proceedings, pages 205-223, 2007. URL: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-540-74143-5_12.
  82. Hoeteck Wee. Black-box, round-efficient secure computation via non-malleability amplification. In FOCS, 2010. Google Scholar
Any Issues?
X

Feedback on the Current Page

CAPTCHA

Thanks for your feedback!

Feedback submitted to Dagstuhl Publishing

Could not send message

Please try again later or send an E-mail
© 2023-2025 Schloss Dagstuhl – LZI GmbH About DROPS Imprint Privacy Contact