{"title":"存在一次性密钥保护方案,而不存在快速密钥保护方案(阈值方案)","authors":"G. Blakley","doi":"10.1109/SP.1980.10016","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Common sense, David Kahn [KA67] and Gilles Brassard [BR79] all argue that there are no unbreakable cryptosystems. What, then, is to be made of the -- provably [D179a, pp. 399-400] unbreakable -- Vernam one-time pad? The somewhat surprising answer is that it is not a cryptosystem at all, but rather a key safeguarding scheme [BL79] used, as all such schemes can be, in the courier mode. This suggests that proofs of invulnerability of key safeguarding schemes, what A. Shamir [SH79] calls threshold schemes, are as natural as proofs of difficulty of breaking cryptosystems are un-natural (perhaps impossible). Indeed, such an approach sets the Vernam one-time pad securely into context. Both the projective geometric threshold scheme [BL79] and the Lagrange interpolation threshold scheme [SH79] profit from being generalized from the field of integers modulo some prime p to arbitrary Galois fields. In particular, their computer implementations are particularly felicitous in some fields with 2n elements.","PeriodicalId":90300,"journal":{"name":"Proceedings. IEEE Symposium on Security and Privacy","volume":"531 1","pages":"108-113"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"1980-04-14","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"2","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"One Time Pads Are Key Safeguarding Schemes, Not Cryptosystems Fast Key Safeguarding Schemes (Threshold Schemes) Exist\",\"authors\":\"G. Blakley\",\"doi\":\"10.1109/SP.1980.10016\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"Common sense, David Kahn [KA67] and Gilles Brassard [BR79] all argue that there are no unbreakable cryptosystems. What, then, is to be made of the -- provably [D179a, pp. 399-400] unbreakable -- Vernam one-time pad? The somewhat surprising answer is that it is not a cryptosystem at all, but rather a key safeguarding scheme [BL79] used, as all such schemes can be, in the courier mode. This suggests that proofs of invulnerability of key safeguarding schemes, what A. Shamir [SH79] calls threshold schemes, are as natural as proofs of difficulty of breaking cryptosystems are un-natural (perhaps impossible). Indeed, such an approach sets the Vernam one-time pad securely into context. Both the projective geometric threshold scheme [BL79] and the Lagrange interpolation threshold scheme [SH79] profit from being generalized from the field of integers modulo some prime p to arbitrary Galois fields. In particular, their computer implementations are particularly felicitous in some fields with 2n elements.\",\"PeriodicalId\":90300,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Proceedings. IEEE Symposium on Security and Privacy\",\"volume\":\"531 1\",\"pages\":\"108-113\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"1980-04-14\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"2\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Proceedings. IEEE Symposium on Security and Privacy\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1109/SP.1980.10016\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Proceedings. IEEE Symposium on Security and Privacy","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1109/SP.1980.10016","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
One Time Pads Are Key Safeguarding Schemes, Not Cryptosystems Fast Key Safeguarding Schemes (Threshold Schemes) Exist
Common sense, David Kahn [KA67] and Gilles Brassard [BR79] all argue that there are no unbreakable cryptosystems. What, then, is to be made of the -- provably [D179a, pp. 399-400] unbreakable -- Vernam one-time pad? The somewhat surprising answer is that it is not a cryptosystem at all, but rather a key safeguarding scheme [BL79] used, as all such schemes can be, in the courier mode. This suggests that proofs of invulnerability of key safeguarding schemes, what A. Shamir [SH79] calls threshold schemes, are as natural as proofs of difficulty of breaking cryptosystems are un-natural (perhaps impossible). Indeed, such an approach sets the Vernam one-time pad securely into context. Both the projective geometric threshold scheme [BL79] and the Lagrange interpolation threshold scheme [SH79] profit from being generalized from the field of integers modulo some prime p to arbitrary Galois fields. In particular, their computer implementations are particularly felicitous in some fields with 2n elements.