Advertisement

Implementing Attacks on the Approximate Greatest Common Divisor Problem

  • Leizhang WangEmail author
  • Quanbo Qu
  • Tuoyan Li
  • Yange Chen
Conference paper
Part of the Communications in Computer and Information Science book series (CCIS, volume 1105)

Abstract

The security of many fully homomorphic encryption (FHE) schemes is guaranteed by the difficulty of the approximate greatest common divisor (AGCD) problem. Therefore, the study of AGCD problem is of great significance to the security of the fully homomorphic encryption. This paper surveys three kinds of attacks on the AGCD problem, i.e. exhaustive search attack, simultaneous Diophantine approximation (SDA) attack and the orthogonal lattice (OL) attack. We utilize the Number Theory Library (NTL) to implement the SDA attack and the optimized OL attack on the AGCD problem. Comparisons are performed based on the experimental results to illustrate that the exhaustive search attack can be easily defended just by increasing the size of ρ. And increasing the length of the public key is the most effective way to defend SDA attack and OL attack. Meanwhile, we concluded that the success rate of SDA attack and OL attack can be improved by increasing the dimension of lattice at the expense of a certain time efficiency. In addition, the analysis and experiments show that the fully homomorphic computing efficiency of FHE scheme can’t be improved by simply increasing the private key without appropriately increasing the size of public key. Otherwise, the FHE scheme is vulnerable to OL and SDA attack. Besides, experimental results show that optimized OL attack performs better than both classical OL attack and SDA attack in terms of attack success rate and the time efficiency.

Keywords

Approximate greatest common divisor problem Orthogonal lattice attack Simultaneous diophantine approximation attack Lattice reduction algorithm 

Notes

Acknowledgement

First of all, I would like to thank my mentor Professor Baocang Wang and Professor Hailou Yao. When I was puzzled to solve the AGCD problem, it was Professor Wang’s appropriate advice that guides me. In addition, when I wrote my paper, Professor Wang and Professor Yao also gave me many valuable opinions and suggestions which benefited me a lot. In the end, I would like to express my heartfelt thanks to Professor Wang and Professor Yao for their concern and help.

This work is supported by the National Key R&D Program of China under Grant No. 2017YFB0802000, the National Natural Science Foundation of China under Grant Nos. 61572390, U1736111, the National Cryptography Development Fund under Grant No. MMJJ20180111, the Plan For Scientific Innovation Talent of Henan Province under Grand no. 184100510012, the Program for Science & Technology Innovation Talents in Universities of Henan Province under Grant No. 8HASTIT022, the Innovation Scientists and Technicians Troop Construction Projects of Henan Province.

References

  1. 1.
    Gentry, C.: Fully homomorphic encryption using hidden ideal lattice. In: Proceedings of the 41st Annual ACM Symposium on Symposium on Theory of Computing-STOC 2009, pp. 169–178. ACM (2009)Google Scholar
  2. 2.
    van Dijk, M., Gentry, C., Halevi, S., Vaikuntanathan, V.: Fully homomorphic encryption over the integers. In: Gilbert, H. (ed.) EUROCRYPT 2010. LNCS, vol. 6110, pp. 24–43. Springer, Heidelberg (2010).  https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-642-13190-5_2CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Brakerski, Z., Vaikuntanathan, V.: Efficient fully homomorphic encryption from (standard) LWE. In: Foundations of Computer Science (FOCS). 2011 IEEE 52nd Annual Symposium on IEEE, 97–106 (2011)Google Scholar
  4. 4.
    Smart, N.P., Vercauteren, F.: Fully homomorphic encryption with relatively small key and ciphertext sizes. In: Nguyen, Phong Q., Pointcheval, D. (eds.) PKC 2010. LNCS, vol. 6056, pp. 420–443. Springer, Heidelberg (2010).  https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-642-13013-7_25CrossRefzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Stehlé, D., Steinfeld, R.: Faster fully homomorphic encryption. In: Abe, M. (ed.) ASIACRYPT 2010. LNCS, vol. 6477, pp. 377–394. Springer, Heidelberg (2010).  https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-642-17373-8_22CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Coron, J.-S., Mandal, A., Naccache, D., Tibouchi, M.: Fully homomorphic encryption over the integers with shorter public keys. In: Rogaway, P. (ed.) CRYPTO 2011. LNCS, vol. 6841, pp. 487–504. Springer, Heidelberg (2011).  https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-642-22792-9_28CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Coron, J.-S., Naccache, D., Tibouchi, M.: Public key compression and modulus switching for fully homomorphic encryption over the integers. In: Pointcheval, D., Johansson, T. (eds.) EUROCRYPT 2012. LNCS, vol. 7237, pp. 446–464. Springer, Heidelberg (2012).  https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-642-29011-4_27CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Cheon, J.H., et al.: Batch fully homomorphic encryption over the integers. In: Johansson, T., Nguyen, Phong Q. (eds.) EUROCRYPT 2013. LNCS, vol. 7881, pp. 315–335. Springer, Heidelberg (2013).  https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-642-38348-9_20CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Gentry, C., Halevi, S., Peikert, C., Smart, N.P.: Ring switching in BGV-style homomorphic encryption. In: Visconti, I., De Prisco, R. (eds.) SCN 2012. LNCS, vol. 7485, pp. 19–37. Springer, Heidelberg (2012).  https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-642-32928-9_2CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Gentry, C., Halevi, S.: Implementing Gentry’s fully-homomorphic encryption scheme. In: Paterson, K.G. (ed.) EUROCRYPT 2011. LNCS, vol. 6632, pp. 129–148. Springer, Heidelberg (2011).  https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-642-20465-4_9CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Gentry, C., Halevi, S., Smart, Nigel P.: Fully homomorphic encryption with polylog overhead. In: Pointcheval, D., Johansson, T. (eds.) EUROCRYPT 2012. LNCS, vol. 7237, pp. 465–482. Springer, Heidelberg (2012).  https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-642-29011-4_28CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Lenstra, A.K., Lenstra, H.W., Lovász, L.: Factoring polynomials with rational coefficients. Math. Ann. 261(4), 515–534 (1982)MathSciNetCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Schnorr, C.-P., Euchner, M.: Lattice basis reduction: Improved practical algorithms and solving subset sum problems. Math. Program. 66, 181–199 (1994)MathSciNetCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Schnorr, C.P., Hörner, H.H.: Attacking the chor-rivest cryptosystem by improved lattice reduction. In: Guillou, Louis C., Quisquater, J.-J. (eds.) EUROCRYPT 1995. LNCS, vol. 921, pp. 1–12. Springer, Heidelberg (1995).  https://doi.org/10.1007/3-540-49264-X_1CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Gama, N., Nguyen, P.Q.: Predicting lattice reduction. In: Smart, N. (ed.) EUROCRYPT 2008. LNCS, vol. 4965, pp. 31–51. Springer, Heidelberg (2008).  https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-540-78967-3_3CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Chen, Y., Nguyen, P.Q.: BKZ 2.0: better lattice security estimates. In: Lee, D.H., Wang, X. (eds.) ASIACRYPT 2011. LNCS, vol. 7073, pp. 1–20. Springer, Heidelberg (2011).  https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-642-25385-0_1CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    Novocin, A., Stehl´e, D., Villard, G.: An LLL-reduction algorithm with quasi-linear time complexity: extended abstract. In: Proceedings of the Fortythird Annual ACM Symposium on Theory of Computing, STOC 2011, pp. 403–412. ACM, New York (2011)Google Scholar
  18. 18.
    Aono, Y., Wang, Y., Hayashi, T., Takagi, T.: Improved progressive BKZ algorithms and their precise cost estimation by sharp simulator. In: Fischlin, M., Coron, J.-S. (eds.) EUROCRYPT 2016. LNCS, vol. 9665, pp. 789–819. Springer, Heidelberg (2016).  https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-662-49890-3_30CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. 19.
    Meixia, L., Yunfei, F.: LLL algorithm and application. J. Chongqing Vocat. Tech. Inst. 16(2), 161–163 (2007)Google Scholar
  20. 20.
    Chen, L., Ben, H., Huang, J.: An encryption depth optimization scheme for fully homomorphic encryption. In: International Conference on Identification, Information and Knowledge in the Internet of Thingsm Beijing, pp. 137–141 (2014)Google Scholar
  21. 21.
    Chen, Z., Wang, J., Zhang, Z., Song, X.: A fully homomorphic encryption scheme with better key size. China Communications 11(9), 82–92 (2014)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. 22.
    Chen, Y., Nguyen, P.Q.: Faster algorithms for approximate common divisors: breaking fully-homomorphic-encryption challenges over the integers. In: Pointcheval, D., Johansson, T. (eds.) EUROCRYPT 2012. LNCS, vol. 7237, pp. 502–519. Springer, Heidelberg (2012).  https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-642-29011-4_30CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. 23.
    Challa, R., VijayaKumari, G., Sunny, B.: Secure Image processing using LWE based Homomorphic encryption. In: IEEE International Conference on Electrical, Computer and Communication Technologies (ICECCT). Coimbatore, pp. 1–6 (2015)Google Scholar
  24. 24.
    Baocang, W., Yupu, H.: Public key cryptosystem based on two cryptographic assumptions. IEE Proc. Commun. 152(6), 861–865 (2005)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. 25.
    Baocang, W., Yupu, H.: Diophantine approximation attack on a fast public key cryptosystem. In: Chen, K., Deng, R., Lai, X., Zhou, J. (eds.) ISPEC 2006. LNCS, vol. 3903, pp. 25–32. Springer, Heidelberg (2006).  https://doi.org/10.1007/11689522_3CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. 26.
    Wang, B., Wu, Q., Hu, Y.: A knapsack-based probabilistic encryption scheme. Inf. Sci. 177(19), 3884–3981 (2007)MathSciNetCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. 27.
    Howgrave-Graham, N.: Approximate integer common divisors. In: Silverman, J.H. (ed.) CaLC 2001. LNCS, vol. 2146, pp. 51–66. Springer, Heidelberg (2001).  https://doi.org/10.1007/3-540-44670-2_6CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. 28.
    Jintai, D., Chengdong, T.: A new algorithm for solving the general approximate common divisors problem and cryptanalysis of the FHE based on the GACD problem. Cryptology ePrint Archive, Report 2014/042 (2014). http://eprint.iacr.org/
  29. 29.
    Lepoint, T.: Design and implementation of lattice-based cryptography. Theses, Ecole Normale Sup´erieure de Paris - ENS Paris, June 2014Google Scholar
  30. 30.
    Cheon, J.H., Stehlé, D.: Fully homomophic encryption over the integers revisited. In: Oswald, E., Fischlin, M. (eds.) EUROCRYPT 2015. LNCS, vol. 9056, pp. 513–536. Springer, Heidelberg (2015).  https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-662-46800-5_20CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. 31.
    Galbraith, S.D., Gebregiyorgis, S.W., Murphy, S.D.: Algorithms for the approximate common divisor problem. In: Proceedings of Twelfth Algorithmic Number Theory Symposium (ANTS-XII) (2016)Google Scholar
  32. 32.
    Galbraith, S.D., Gebregiyorgis, S.W., Murphy, S.: Algorithms for the approximate common divisor problem. LMS J. Comput. Math. 19(A), 58–72 (2016)MathSciNetCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. 33.
    Xu, J., Sarkar, S., Hu, L.: Revisiting orthogonal lattice attacks on approximate common divisor problems and their applications. Cryptology ePrint Archive: Report 2018/1208, pp. 6–11 (2018)Google Scholar
  34. 34.
    Schnorr, C.P.: Lattice reduction by random sampling and birthday methods. Stacs 2607, 145–156 (2005)MathSciNetzbMATHGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Nature Singapore Pte Ltd. 2019

Authors and Affiliations

  • Leizhang Wang
    • 1
    • 2
    • 3
    Email author
  • Quanbo Qu
    • 1
    • 2
  • Tuoyan Li
    • 3
  • Yange Chen
    • 4
  1. 1.State Key Laboratory of Integrated Service NetworksXidian UniversityXi’anPeople’s Republic of China
  2. 2.Cryptographic Research CenterXidian UniversityXi’anPeople’s Republic of China
  3. 3.College of Applied ScienceBeijing University of TechnologyBeijingPeople’s Republic of China
  4. 4.School of Information EngineeringXuchang UniversityXuchangChina

Personalised recommendations