Advertisement

A Provably Secure Restrictive Partially Blind Signature Scheme

  • Greg Maitland
  • Colin Boyd
Conference paper
Part of the Lecture Notes in Computer Science book series (LNCS, volume 2274)

Abstract

The concept of partially blind signatures was first introduced by Abe and Fujisaki. Subsequently, in work by Abe and Okamoto, a provably secure construction was proposed along with a formalised definition for partially blind schemes. The construction was based on a witness indistinguishable protocol described by Cramer et al. and utilises a blind Schnorr signature scheme.

This paper investigates incorporating the restrictive property proposed by Brands into a partially blind signature scheme. The proposed scheme follows the construction proposed by Abe and Okamoto and makes use of Brands’ restrictive blind signature scheme.

Keywords

Signature Scheme Blind Signature Input Tape Blind Signature Scheme Output Tape 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.

References

  1. 1.
    Masayuki Abe and Jan Camenisch. Partially blind signature schemes. In Symposium on Cryptography and Information Security. IEICE, January 1997.Google Scholar
  2. 2.
    Masayuki Abe and Eiichiro Fujisaki. Howto date blind signatures. In Kwangjo Kim and Tsutomu Matsumoto, editors, International Conference on the Theory and Application of Cryptology and Information Security (ASIACRYPT’96), volume 1163 of Lecture Notes in Computer Science, pages 244–251. Springer-Verlag, November 1996.Google Scholar
  3. 3.
    Masayuki Abe and Tatsuaki Okamoto. Provably secure partially blind signatures. In Mihir Bellare, editor, Advances in Cryptology—CRYPTO 2000, volume 1880 of Lecture Notes in Computer Science, pages 271–286. Springer-Verlag, 20–24 August 2000.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    C. Boyd, E. Foo, and C. Pavlovski. Efficient electronic cash using batch signatures. In J. Pieprzyk, R. Safavi-Naini, and J. Seberry, editors, Australasian Conference on Information Security and Privacy (ACISP’99), volume 1587 of Lecture Notes in Computer Science, pages 244–257. Springer-Verlag, 1999.Google Scholar
  5. 5.
    Stefan Brands. An efficient off-line electronic cash system based on the representation problem. Technical Report CS-R9323, Centrum voor Wiskunde en Informatica (CWI), March 1993.Google Scholar
  6. 6.
    Stefan Brands. Untraceable off-line cash in wallets with observers. In Douglas R. Stinson, editor, Advances in Cryptology—CRYPTO’ 93, volume 773 of Lecture Notes in Computer Science, pages 302–318. Springer-Verlag, 22–26 August 1993.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    A. Chan, Y. Frankel, and Y. Tsiounis. Easy come — easy go divisible cash. In Kaisa Nyberg, editor, Advances in Cryptology—EUROCRYPT 98, volume 1403 of Lecture Notes in Computer Science, pages 561–576. Springer-Verlag, 1998.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    D. Chaum and T. Pryds Pedersen. Wallet databases with observers. In Ernest F. Brickell, editor, Advances in Cryptology—CRYPTO’ 92, volume 740 of Lecture Notes in Computer Science, pages 89–105. Springer-Verlag, 1993, 16–20 August 1992.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    David Chaum. Blind signatures for untraceable payments. In David Chaum, Ronald L. Rivest, and Alan T. Sherman, editors, Advances in Cryptology: Proceedings of Crypto 82, pages 199–203. Plenum Press, New York and London, 1983, 23–25 August 1982.Google Scholar
  10. 10.
    Ronald J. F. Cramer, Ivan B. Damgård, and L. A. M. Schoenmakers. Proofs of partial knowledge and simplified design of witness hiding protocols. In 116, page 18. Centrum voor Wiskunde en Informatica (CWI), ISSN 0169-118X, February 28 1994. AA (Department of Algorithmics and Architecture).Google Scholar
  11. 11.
    U. Feige and A. Shamir. Witness indistinguishable and witness hiding protocols. In Baruch Awerbuch, editor, Proceedings of the 22nd Annual ACM Symposium on the Theory of Computing, pages 416–426, Baltimore, MY, May 1990. ACM Press.Google Scholar
  12. 12.
    A. Juels, M. Luby, and R. Ostrovsky. Security of blind digital signatures. In Burton S. Kaliski Jr., editor, Advances in Cryptology—CRYPTO’ 97, volume 1294 of Lecture Notes in Computer Science, pages 150–164. Springer-Verlag, 17–21 August 1997.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Shingo MIYAZAKI, Masayuki ABE, and Kouichi SAKURAI. Partially blind signature schemes for the dss and for a discrete log. based message recovery signature. In Korea-Japan Joint Workshop on Information Security and Cryptology, pages 217–226, 1997.Google Scholar
  14. 14.
    DaeHun Nyang and JooSeok Song. Preventing double-spent coins from revealing user’s whole secret. In J.S. Song, editor, Second International Conference on Information Security and Cryptology (ICISC’99), volume 1787 of Lecture Notes in Computer Science, pages 13–20. Springer-Verlag, 1999.Google Scholar
  15. 15.
    T. Okamoto. Provably secure and practical identification schemes and corresponding signature schemes. In Ernest F. Brickell, editor, Advances in Cryptology—CRYPTO’ 92, volume 740 of Lecture Notes in Computer Science, pages 31–53. Springer-Verlag, 1993, 16–20 August 1992.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    D. Pointcheval. Strengthened security for blind signatures. In Kaisa Nyberg, editor, Advances in Cryptology—EUROCRYPT 98, volume 1403 of Lecture Notes in Computer Science, pages 391–403. Springer-Verlag, 1998.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    C. P. Schnorr. Efficient signature generation by smart cards. Journal of Cryptology, 4(3):161–174, 1991.zbMATHCrossRefMathSciNetGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
    L. A. M. Schoenmakers. An efficient electronic payment system withstanding parallel attacks. Technical Report CS-R9522, CWI-Centrum voor Wiskunde en Informatica, March 31, 1995.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg 2002

Authors and Affiliations

  • Greg Maitland
    • 1
  • Colin Boyd
    • 1
  1. 1.Information Security Research CentreQueensland University of TechnologyBrisbaneAustralia

Personalised recommendations