Abstract

Abstract
This work presents a novel machine-checked tight security proof for XMSS —a stateful hash-based signature scheme that is (1) standardized in RFC 8391 and NIST SP 800-208, and (2) employed as a primary building block of SPHINCS+, one of the signature schemes recently selected for standardization as a result of NIST’s post-quantum competition. In 2020, Kudinov, Kiktenko, and Fedoro pointed out a flaw affecting the tight security proofs of SPHINCS+ and XMSS. For the case of SPHINCS+, this flaw was fixed in a subsequent tight security proof by Hülsing and Kudinov. Unfortunately, employing the fix from this proof to construct an analogous tight security proof for XMSS would merely demonstrate security with respect to an insufficient notion. At the cost of modeling the message-hashing function as a random oracle, we complete the tight security proof for XMSS and formally verify it using the EasyCrypt proof assistant. (Note that this merely extends the use of the random oracle model, as this model is already required in other parts of the security analysis to justify the currently standardized parameter values). As part of this endeavor, we formally verify the crucial step common to the security proofs of SPHINCS+ and XMSS that was found to be flawed before, thereby confirming that the core of the aforementioned security proof by Hülsing and Kudinov is correct. As this is the first work to formally verify proofs for hash-based signature schemes in EasyCrypt, we develop several novel libraries for the fundamental cryptographic concepts underlying such schemes—e.g., hash functions and digital signature schemes—establishing a common starting point for future formal verification efforts. These libraries will be particularly helpful in formally verifying proofs of other hash-based signature schemes such as LMS or SPHINCS+. © 2023, International Association for Cryptologic Research.

Abstract

Abstract
This paper presents a proof system for reasoning about execution time bounds for a core imperative programming language. Proof systems are defined for three different scenarios: approximations of the worst-case execution time, exact time reasoning, and less pessimistic execution time estimation using amortized analysis. We define a Hoare logic for the three cases and prove its soundness with respect to an annotated cost-aware operational semantics. Finally, we define a verification conditions (VC) generator that generates the goals needed to prove program correctness, cost, and termination. Those goals are then sent to the Easycrypt toolset for validation. The practicality of the proof system is demonstrated with an implementation in OCaml of the different modules needed to apply it to example programs. Our case studies are motivated by real-time and cryptographic software.

Abstract
In this work, we enhance the EasyCrypt proof assistant to reason about the computational complexity of adversaries. The key technical tool is a Hoare logic for reasoning about computational complexity (execution time and oracle calls) of adversarial computations. Our Hoare logic is built on top of the module system used by EasyCrypt for modeling adversaries. We prove that our logic is sound w.r.t. the semantics of EasyCrypt programs-we also provide full semantics for the EasyCrypt module system, which was lacking previously. We showcase (for the first time in EasyCrypt and in other computer-aided cryptographic tools) how our approach can express precise relationships between the probability of adversarial success and their execution time. In particular, we can quantify existentially over adversaries in a complexity class and express general composition statements in simulation-based frameworks. Moreover, such statements can be composed to derive standard concrete security bounds for cryptographic constructions whose security is proved in a modular way. As a main benefit of our approach, we revisit security proofs of some well-known cryptographic constructions and present a new formalization of universal composability.

Abstract