An ECDSA modification with signing equation has the properties that the signer avoids modular inversion and that passive universal forgery is equivalent to inverting a sum of two functions with freely independent inputs.
Let and where is an integer representation of the point . The free sum of and is . A RKHD signature verifies if and only if , where is the hash of the message and is the public key. So RKHD security relies upon, among other things, the assumption that free sum is 1-way (or unforgoable, to be precise).
Other free sums are 1-way under plausible assumptions: elliptic curve discrete logs, integer factoring, and secure small-key
Wegman--Carter--Shoup authentication. Yet other free sums of 1-way functions (integer-factoring based) fail to be 1-way. The ease with which these free sums arise hints at the ease determining RKHD security.
RKHD signatures are very similar to ECGDSA (an elliptic curve version Agnew--Mullin--Vanstone signatures): variable- forgers of the two schemes are algorithmically equivalent. But ECGDSA requires the signer to do one modular inversion, a small implementation security risk.
@misc{cryptoeprint:2018/186,
author = {Daniel R. L. Brown},
title = {{RKHD} {ElGamal} signing and 1-way sums},
howpublished = {Cryptology {ePrint} Archive, Paper 2018/186},
year = {2018},
url = {https://eprint.iacr.org/2018/186}
}
Note: In order to protect the privacy of readers, eprint.iacr.org
does not use cookies or embedded third party content.