CoChat
Sign Up
Cited by 80Cryptography and Data SecurityAdvanced Authentication Protocols SecurityQuantum Information and Cryptography

GNUC: A new universal composability framework

Open access
Hofheinz, Dennis, Shoup, Victor·2015·Journal of Cryptology
DOI 10.1007/s00145-013-9160-y
Open this paper in CoChat — free accountOpen PDF

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1007/s00145-013-9160-y

Cites

Statistics

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

  • Software engineering shows a constant trend to create conditions and frameworks for supporting component integration and communication.

    “From the Definition of Composability in Software [146] and some implementations [147] up to the Software Component Model [148] [149] [150] efforts, software engineering shows a constant trend to create conditions and frameworks for supporting component integration and communication, e.g., also in specific fields like CPS [151].”

    From Digital Twin in the IoT Context: A Survey on Technical Features, Scenarios, and Architectural Models (2020) · cites this paper as [147]

    The paper’s “Protocol hierarchy” section says its framework makes subprotocol composition easy to analyze and implement, so it supports an example of a composability framework. Its “Protocols” section defines composition for cryptographic protocols, not a general definition of software composability; it does not establish a constant trend across software engineering toward component integration and communication. No page number is available in our copy. (LLM, conf=0.81)

    Experimental — accuracy not yet measured

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Cites

No references could be resolved yet.

Research works printed but not linked: 31

  1. M. Backes, B. Pfitzmann, M. Waidner, A composable cryptographic library with nested operations, in ACM CCS 03: 10th Conference on Computer and Communications Security, ed.
  2. by S. Jajodia, V. Atluri, T. Jaeger, Washington, DC, USA, October 27-30, 2003 (ACM, New York, 2003), pp. 220-230
  3. M. Backes, B. Pfitzmann, M. Waidner, A general composition theorem for secure reactive systems, in TCC 2004: 1st Theory of Cryptography Conference, ed. by M. Naor, Cambridge, MA, USA, Febru- ary 19-21, 2004. Lecture Notes in Computer Science, vol. 2951 (Springer, Berlin, 2004), pp. 336-354
  4. M. Backes, B. Pfitzmann, M. Waidner, The reactive simulatability (RSIM) framework for asynchronous systems. Inf. Comput. 205(12), 1685-1720 (2007)
  5. B. Barak, How to play almost any mental game over the net-concurrent composition via super- polynomial simulation, in 46th Annual Symposium on Foundations of Computer Science, Pittsburgh, PA, USA, October 23-25, 2005 (IEEE Comput. Soc., Los Alamitos, 2005), pp. 543-552
  6. by V. Shoup, Santa Barbara, CA, USA, August 14-18, 2005. Lecture Notes in Computer Science, vol. 3621 (Springer, Berlin, 2005), pp. 361-377
  7. by J. Feigenbaum, Santa Barbara, CA, USA, August 11-15, 1992. Lecture Notes in Computer Science, vol. 576 (Springer, Berlin, 1992), pp. 377-391
  8. P. Bogetoft, D.L. Christensen, I. Damgård, M. Geisler, T. Jakobsen, M. Krøigaard, J.D. Nielsen, J.B. Nielsen, K. Nielsen, J. Pagter, M.I. Schwartzbach, T. Toft, Secure multiparty computation goes live, in FC 2009: 13th International Conference on Financial Cryptography and Data Security, ed. by R. Din- gledine, P. Golle, Accra Beach, Barbados, February 23-26, 2009. Lecture Notes in Computer Science, vol. 5628 (Springer, Berlin, 2009), pp. 325-343
  9. J. Camenisch, A. Kiayias, M. Yung, On the portability of generalized Schnorr proofs, in Advances in Cryptology-EUROCRYPT 2009, ed. by A. Joux, Cologne, Germany, April 26-30, 2009. Lecture Notes in Computer Science, vol. 5479 (Springer, Berlin, 2009), pp. 425-442
  10. by T. Rabin, Santa Barbara, CA, USA, August 15-19, 2010. Lecture Notes in Computer Science, vol. 6223 (Springer, Berlin, 2010), pp. 255-276
  11. R. Canetti, Security and composition of multiparty cryptographic protocols. J. Cryptol. 13(1), 143-202 (2000)
  12. R. Canetti, Universally composable security: a new paradigm for cryptographic protocols, in 42nd An- nual Symposium on Foundations of Computer Science, Las Vegas, NV, USA, October 14-17, 2001 (IEEE Comput. Soc., Los Alamitos, 2001), pp. 136-145
  13. by J. Kilian, Santa Barbara, CA, USA, August 19-23, 2001. Lecture Notes in Computer Science, vol. 2139 (Springer, Berlin, 2001), pp. 19-40
  14. by D. Boneh, Santa Barbara, CA, USA, August 17-21, 2003. Lecture Notes in Computer Science, vol. 2729 (Springer, Berlin, 2003), pp. 265-281
  15. R. Canetti, Y. Lindell, R. Ostrovsky, A. Sahai, Universally composable two-party and multi-party secure computation, in 34th Annual ACM Symposium on Theory of Computing, Montréal, Québec, Canada, May 19-21, 2002 (ACM, New York, 2002), pp. 494-503
  16. R. Canetti, Y. Dodis, R. Pass, S. Walfish, Universally composable security with global setup, in TCC 2007: 4th Theory of Cryptography Conference, ed.
  17. by S.P. Vadhan, Amsterdam, The Netherlands, February 21-24, 2007. Lecture Notes in Computer Science, vol. 4392 (Springer, Berlin, 2007), pp. 61-85
  18. S. Gajek, M. Manulis, O. Pereira, A.-R. Sadeghi, J. Schwenk, Universally composable security analysis of TLS, in ProvSec (2008), pp. 313-327
  19. O. Goldreich, H. Krawczyk, On the composition of zero-knowledge proof systems. SIAM J. Comput. 25(1), 169-192 (1996)
  20. O. Goldreich, S. Micali, A. Wigderson, Proofs that yield nothing but their validity and a methodology of cryptographic protocol design, in 27th Annual Symposium on Foundations of Computer Science, Toronto, Ontario, Canada, October 27-29, 1986 (IEEE Comput. Soc., Los Alamitos, 1986), pp. 174- 187
  21. J. Håstad, Solving simultaneous modular equations of low degree. SIAM J. Comput. 17(2), 336-341 (1988)
  22. D. Hofheinz, J. Müller-Quade, D. Unruh, Polynomial runtime in simulatability definitions, in CSFW (2005), pp. 156-169
  23. D. Hofheinz, D. Unruh, J. Müller-Quade, Polynomial runtime and composability. J. Cryptol. 26(3), 375-441 (2013)
  24. S. Jarecki, A. Lysyanskaya, Adaptively secure threshold cryptography: introducing concurrency, re- moving erasures, in Advances in Cryptology-EUROCRYPT 2000, ed. by B. Preneel, Bruges, Belgium, May 14-18, 2000. Lecture Notes in Computer Science, vol. 1807 (Springer, Berlin, 2000), pp. 221-242
  25. R. Küsters, Simulation-based security with inexhaustible interactive Turing machines, in CSFW (IEEE Comput. Soc., Los Alamitos, 2006), pp. 309-320
  26. R. Küsters, M. Tuengerthal, Computational soundness for key exchange protocols with symmetric en- cryption, in ACM CCS 09: 16th Conference on Computer and Communications Security, ed. by E. Al- Shaer, S. Jha, A.D. Keromytis, Chicago, Illinois, USA, November 9-13, 2009 (ACM, New York, 2009), pp. 91-100
  27. by C. Cachin, J. Camenisch, Interlaken, Switzerland, May 2-6, 2004. Lecture Notes in Computer Science, vol. 3027 (Springer, Berlin, 2004), pp. 382-400
  28. U. Maurer, R. Renner, Abstract cryptography, in The Second Symposium in Innovations in Computer Science, ICS 2011, ed. by B. Chazelle (Tsinghua University Press, Tsinghua, 2011), pp. 1-21
  29. by J. Feigenbaum, Santa Barbara, CA, USA, August 11-15, 1992. Lecture Notes in Computer Science, vol. 576 (Springer, Berlin, 1992), pp. 392-404
  30. B. Pfitzmann, M. Waidner, A model for asynchronous reactive systems and its application to secure message transmission, in IEEE Symposium on Security and Privacy (2001), pp. 184-200
  31. M. Prabhakaran, New notions of security, PhD thesis, Princeton University, 2005

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Hofheinz, D., & Shoup, V.
Affiliations
  • Karlsruhe Institute of Technology (DE)
  • New York University (US)
Corresponding author
Hofheinz, Dennis
ORCID
Venue
Journal of Cryptology
Publisher
Springer Science and Business Media LLC
Published
2013-10-05
Volume
28
Issue
3
Pages
423-508
ISSN
  • 0933-2790 (ISSN-L)
  • 1432-1378
DOI
10.1007/s00145-013-9160-y
OpenAlex
W2123352750
Cited by
80
References
0
Citations by year
2026: 3 · 2025: 3 · 2024: 5 · 2023: 2 · 2022: 5 · 2021: 7 · 2020: 10 · 2019: 7 · 2018: 3 · 2017: 4 · 2016: 6 · 2015: 7 · 2014: 6 · 2013: 11 · 2012: 1
FWCI
10.34
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Licence
www.springer.com/tdm (tdm)
Locations
  • Journal of Cryptology (publishedVersion)
  • IACR Cryptology ePrint Archive (submittedVersion)
Funders
  • National Science Foundation (0716690)
  • Deutsche Forschungsgemeinschaft
Topics
  • Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Artificial Intelligence › Cryptography and Data Security
  • Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Computer Networks and Communications › Advanced Authentication Protocols Security
  • Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Artificial Intelligence › Quantum Information and Cryptography
Keywords
universal composability, multi-party protocols, polynomial-time attack, corruption, modular protocol design, authenticated communication, secure function evaluation, commitment schemes

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review