Weizmann Logo
ECCC
Electronic Colloquium on Computational Complexity

Under the auspices of the Computational Complexity Foundation (CCF)

Login | Register | Classic Style



REPORTS > DETAIL:

Revision(s):

Revision #1 to TR20-095 | 7th December 2020 04:16

On Basing Auxiliary-Input Cryptography on NP-hardness via Nonadaptive Black-Box Reductions

RSS-Feed




Revision #1
Authors: Mikito Nanashima
Accepted on: 7th December 2020 04:16
Downloads: 132
Keywords: 


Abstract:

Constructing one-way functions based on NP-hardness is a central challenge in theoretical computer science. Unfortunately, Akavia et al. presented strong evidence that a nonadaptive black-box (BB) reduction is insufficient to solve this challenge. However, should we give up such a central proof technique even for an intermediate step?

In this paper, we turn our eyes from standard cryptographic primitives to weaker cryptographic primitives allowed to take auxiliary-input and continue to explore the capability of nonadaptive BB reductions to base auxiliary-input primitives on NP-hardness. Specifically, we prove the followings: (1) if we base an auxiliary-input pseudorandom generator (AIPRG) on NP-hardness via a nonadaptive BB reduction, then the polynomial hierarchy collapses; (2) if we base an auxiliary-input one-way function (AIOWF) or auxiliary-input hitting set generator (AIHSG) on NP-hardness via a nonadaptive BB reduction, then an (i.o.-)one-way function also exists based on NP-hardness (via an adaptive BB reduction).

These theorems extend our knowledge on nonadaptive BB reductions out of the current worst-to-average framework. The first result provides new evidence that nonadaptive BB reductions are insufficient to base AIPRG on NP-hardness. The second result also yields a weaker but still surprising consequence of nonadaptive BB reductions, i.e., a one-way function based on NP-hardness. In fact, the second result is interpreted in the following two opposite ways. Pessimistically, it shows that basing AIOWF or AIHSG on NP-hardness via nonadaptive BB reductions is harder than constructing a one-way function based on NP-hardness, which can be regarded as a negative result. Note that AIHSG is a weak primitive implied even by the hardness of learning; thus, this pessimistic view provides conceptually stronger limitations than the currently known limitations on nonadaptive BB reductions. Optimistically, it offers a new hope: breakthrough construction of auxiliary-input primitives might also provide construction standard cryptographic primitives. This optimistic view enhances the significance of further investigation on constructing auxiliary-input or other intermediate cryptographic primitives instead of standard cryptographic primitives.



Changes to previous version:

Added Section 4 and fixed typographic errors


Paper:

TR20-095 | 24th June 2020 15:22

On Basing Auxiliary-Input Cryptography on NP-hardness via Nonadaptive Black-Box Reductions


Abstract:

A black-box (BB) reduction is a central proof technique in theoretical computer science. However, the limitations on BB reductions have been revealed for several decades, and the series of previous work gives strong evidence that we should avoid a nonadaptive BB reduction to base cryptography on NP-hardness (e.g., Akavia et al., 2006). Then should we also give up such a familiar proof technique even for an intermediate step towards cryptography?

In this paper, we continue to explore the capability of nonadaptive BB reductions and extend our knowledge on such a central technique out of the current (worst-to-average) framework. In particular, we investigate the attempt to base weaker cryptographic notions allowed to take auxiliary-input via nonadaptive BB reductions. As a result, we prove the following theorems: (1) if we base an auxiliary-input pseudorandom generator (AIPRG) on NP-hardness via a nonadaptive BB reduction, then the polynomial hierarchy collapses; (2) if we base an auxiliary-input one-way function (AIOWF) or auxiliary-input hitting set generator (AIHSG) on NP-hardness via a nonadaptive BB reduction, then an (i.o.-)one-way function also exists based on NP-hardness (via an adaptive BB reduction).

The first result gives new evidence that nonadaptive BB reductions are insufficient to base AIPRG. The second result also yields a weaker but still surprising consequence of nonadaptive BB reductions, that is, a one-way function based on NP-hardness. In fact, the second result is interpreted as the following two opposite ways. Pessimistically, it shows that basing AIOWF or AIHSG via nonadaptive BB reductions is harder than constructing a one-way function based on NP-hardness, which can be regarded as a negative result. Note that AIHSG is a weak primitive implied even by the hardness of learning; thus, this pessimistic view gives conceptually stronger limitations than the currently known limitations on nonadaptive BB reductions. Optimistically, our result gives a new hope: a breakthrough construction of auxiliary-input primitives might also be useful to construct standard cryptographic primitives. This optimistic view enhances the significance of further investigation on constructing auxiliary-input or other intermediate cryptographic primitives instead of standard cryptographic primitives.



ISSN 1433-8092 | Imprint