Introduction to finite fields and their applications
Introduction to finite fields and their applications
ACISP '97 Proceedings of the Second Australasian Conference on Information Security and Privacy
Signature Schemes Based on 3rd Order Shift Registers
ACISP '01 Proceedings of the 6th Australasian Conference on Information Security and Privacy
SAC '01 Revised Papers from the 8th Annual International Workshop on Selected Areas in Cryptography
CRYPTO '00 Proceedings of the 20th Annual International Cryptology Conference on Advances in Cryptology
ASIACRYPT '99 Proceedings of the International Conference on the Theory and Applications of Cryptology and Information Security: Advances in Cryptology
ASIACRYPT '00 Proceedings of the 6th International Conference on the Theory and Application of Cryptology and Information Security: Advances in Cryptology
Fast Irreducibility and Subgroup Membership Testing in XTR
PKC '01 Proceedings of the 4th International Workshop on Practice and Theory in Public Key Cryptography: Public Key Cryptography
| Hi-index | 0.00 |
In this paper we will compare two signature schemes proposed by different sets of authors. One is the XTR-Nyberg-Rueppel signature proposed by A.K. Lenstra and E.R. Verheul in [3] and the other is the signature scheme proposed by C.H. Tan, X. Yi and C.K. Siew (We will call it TYS signature.) in [9]. XTR-NR signature uses the third degree trace projection Tr : GF(p6) 驴 GF(p2) and has been generalized in [8] by Lim et. al. as a scheme in GF(p6m) using Tr : GF(p6m) 驴 GF(p2m). On the other hand, TYS signature is based on a third order LFSR. Tan et. al. claimed that TYS signature is as secure as Schnorr signature scheme. We will explain why these two schemes are essentially the same. In addition, we will point out that TYS signature as it is has some flaws in their arguments. We will show that in order to cure the flaws of TYS signature, one should bring in exactly the same security and efficiency consideration of XTR scheme as in [8].