Main

ConstUS_discloses_V2

Section malicious_adversary_case_analysis
Type Lemma
Proof Lines 5

Signature

Lemma ConstUS_discloses_V2 : US = ConstUS -> Dotp2_rv VS US = V2.

Description

If an active adversary controls Alice, force `us` always output `(1, 0)`, then the key privacy premise `v2 _|_ dotp2_rv us vs` is impossible. In contrast, if Alice is an fair player, the probability that `us` outputs that specific value `(1, 0)` is 1/m^2. Finally, if Bob enforce ZPK check to abort the protocol when that value is generated, `v2 _|_ dotp2_rv us vs` is guaranteed, and the protocol is secure with that mitigation ("security with abort") \cite[\S5.2]{dumas2017dual}. Therefore, here we examine the compromised case: `us = (1, 0) -> ~ v2 _|_ dotp2_rv us vs` and the secure case: `us != (1, 0) -> v2 _|_ dotp2_rv us vs`.

Uses (0)

This lemma does not use any other lemmas from the stats.

Used By (0)

No lemmas in the stats use this lemma.

Coq Source Code

View on GitHub
Loading source code...
← Back to Stats