Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Group Signatures and More from Isogenies and Lattices: Generic, Simple, and Efficient

  • Conference paper
  • First Online:
Advances in Cryptology – EUROCRYPT 2022 (EUROCRYPT 2022)

Part of the book series: Lecture Notes in Computer Science ((LNCS,volume 13276))

Abstract

We construct an efficient dynamic group signature (or more generally an accountable ring signature) from isogeny and lattice assumptions. Our group signature is based on a simple generic construction that can be instantiated by cryptographically hard group actions such as the CSIDH group action or an MLWE-based group action. The signature is of size \(O(\log N)\), where N is the number of users in the group. Our idea builds on the recent efficient OR-proof by Beullens, Katsumata, and Pintore (Asiacrypt’20), where we efficiently add a proof of valid ciphertext to their OR-proof and further show that the resulting non-interactive zero-knowledge proof system is online extractable.

Our group signatures satisfy more ideal security properties compared to previously known constructions, while simultaneously having an attractive signature size. The signature size of our isogeny-based construction is an order of magnitude smaller than all previously known post-quantum group signatures (e.g., 6.6 KB for 64 members). In comparison, our lattice-based construction has a larger signature size (e.g., either 126 KB or 89 KB for 64 members depending on the satisfied security property). However, since the \(O(\cdot )\)-notation hides a very small constant factor, it remains small even for very large group sizes, say \(2^{20}\).

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this chapter

Log in via an institution
Chapter
USD 29.95
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
eBook
USD 139.00
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as EPUB and PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
Softcover Book
USD 179.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Compact, lightweight edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Institutional subscriptions

Notes

  1. 1.

    We note that their signature size grows by \(\log ^t N\) for a small constant \(t > 1\) rather than simply by \(\log N\). .

  2. 2.

    To be precise, they consider a weaker variant of standard accountable ring signature where no \(\mathsf {Judge}\) algorithm is considered.

  3. 3.

    Note that extractability via rewinding is insufficient for full anonymity as it will cause an exponential reduction loss when trying to extract the witness from adaptively chosen signatures [6].

  4. 4.

    The choice of what to encrypt is rather arbitrary. The same idea works if for instance we hash \(\mathsf {vk}\) into \(\mathcal {C\ell (O)}\) and view the digest as the message.

  5. 5.

    We note that we also have some independent looseness in the anonymity proof since we rely on the “multi-challenge” \(\mathsf {IND\text {-}CPA}\) security from our \(\mathsf {PKE}\). This is handled in a standard way, and this is also why we only achieve a truly tight group signature from lattices and not from isogenies.

  6. 6.

    We note that it seems difficult to use the parallel OR-proof for our sigma protocol since the challenge space is structured.

  7. 7.

    This is w.l.o.g., and guarantees that the list \(L_\mathcal {O}\) is updated with the input/output required to verify the proof \(\mathcal {A}\) receives or sends.

  8. 8.

    An astute reader may notice that the prover is only expected polynomial time. We can always assign an upper bound on the runtime of the prover, but did not do so for better readability. In practice, for concrete choices of the parameter, the number of repetition never exceeds, say 10.

  9. 9.

    Throughout the proof, we use overlines for \((\overline{\mathsf {com}}, \overline{\mathsf {chall}}, \overline{\mathsf {resp}})\) to indicate that it is a transcript of of \(\varPi _{\varSigma }^\mathsf {tOR}\). We use \(\mathsf {resp}_i\) without overlines to indicate elements of \(\overline{\mathsf {resp}}\).

References

  1. Abe, M., Ohkubo, M., Suzuki, K.: 1-out-of-n signatures from a variety of keys. In: Zheng, Y. (ed.) ASIACRYPT 2002. LNCS, vol. 2501, pp. 415–432. Springer, Heidelberg (2002). https://doi.org/10.1007/3-540-36178-2_26

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  2. Attema, T., Lyubashevsky, V., Seiler, G.: Practical product proofs for lattice commitments. In: Micciancio, D., Ristenpart, T. (eds.) CRYPTO 2020. LNCS, vol. 12171, pp. 470–499. Springer, Cham (2020). https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-56880-1_17

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  3. Backes, M., Hanzlik, L., Schneider-Bensch, J.: Membership privacy for fully dynamic group signatures. In: ACM CCS 2019, pp. 2181–2198 (2019)

    Google Scholar 

  4. Bellare, M., Micciancio, D., Warinschi, B.: Foundations of group signatures: formal definitions, simplified requirements, and a construction based on general assumptions. In: Biham, E. (ed.) EUROCRYPT 2003. LNCS, vol. 2656, pp. 614–629. Springer, Heidelberg (2003). https://doi.org/10.1007/3-540-39200-9_38

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  5. Bellare, M., Shi, H., Zhang, C.: Foundations of group signatures: the case of dynamic groups. In: Menezes, A. (ed.) CT-RSA 2005. LNCS, vol. 3376, pp. 136–153. Springer, Heidelberg (2005). https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-540-30574-3_11

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  6. Bernhard, D., Fischlin, M., Warinschi, B.: Adaptive proofs of knowledge in the random oracle model. In: Katz, J. (ed.) PKC 2015. LNCS, vol. 9020, pp. 629–649. Springer, Heidelberg (2015). https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-662-46447-2_28

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  7. Beullens, W., Katsumata, S., Pintore, F.: Calamari and Falafl: logarithmic (linkable) ring signatures from isogenies and lattices. In: Moriai, S., Wang, H. (eds.) ASIACRYPT 2020. LNCS, vol. 12492, pp. 464–492. Springer, Cham (2020). https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-64834-3_16

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  8. Beullens, W., Kleinjung, T., Vercauteren, F.: CSI-FiSh: efficient isogeny based signatures through class group computations. In: Galbraith, S.D., Moriai, S. (eds.) ASIACRYPT 2019. LNCS, vol. 11921, pp. 227–247. Springer, Cham (2019). https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-34578-5_9

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  9. Bichsel, P., Camenisch, J., Neven, G., Smart, N.P., Warinschi, B.: Get shorty via group signatures without encryption. In: Garay, J.A., De Prisco, R. (eds.) SCN 2010. LNCS, vol. 6280, pp. 381–398. Springer, Heidelberg (2010). https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-642-15317-4_24

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  10. Boneh, D., Boyen, X., Shacham, H.: Short group signatures. In: Franklin, M. (ed.) CRYPTO 2004. LNCS, vol. 3152, pp. 41–55. Springer, Heidelberg (2004). https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-540-28628-8_3

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  11. Bootle, J., Cerulli, A., Chaidos, P., Ghadafi, E., Groth, J.: Foundations of fully dynamic group signatures. In: Manulis, M., Sadeghi, A.-R., Schneider, S. (eds.) ACNS 2016. LNCS, vol. 9696, pp. 117–136. Springer, Cham (2016). https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-39555-5_7

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  12. Bootle, J., Cerulli, A., Chaidos, P., Ghadafi, E., Groth, J., Petit, C.: Short accountable ring signatures based on DDH. In: Pernul, G., Ryan, P.Y.A., Weippl, E. (eds.) ESORICS 2015. LNCS, vol. 9326, pp. 243–265. Springer, Cham (2015). https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-24174-6_13

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  13. Bootle, J., Lyubashevsky, V., Seiler, G.: Algebraic techniques for short(er) exact lattice-based zero-knowledge proofs. In: Boldyreva, A., Micciancio, D. (eds.) CRYPTO 2019. LNCS, vol. 11692, pp. 176–202. Springer, Cham (2019). https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-26948-7_7

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  14. Boschini, C., Camenisch, J., Neven, G.: Floppy-sized group signatures from lattices. In: Preneel, B., Vercauteren, F. (eds.) ACNS 2018. LNCS, vol. 10892, pp. 163–182. Springer, Cham (2018). https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-93387-0_9

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  15. Brickell, E.F., Camenisch, J., Chen, L.: Direct anonymous attestation. In: ACM CCS 2004, pp. 132–145 (2004)

    Google Scholar 

  16. Brickell, E., Li, J.: Enhanced privacy ID: a direct anonymous attestation scheme with enhanced revocation capabilities. In: Proceedings of the 2007 ACM Workshop on Privacy in Electronic Society, pp. 21–30 (2007)

    Google Scholar 

  17. Camenisch, J.: Efficient and generalized group signatures. In: Fumy, W. (ed.) EUROCRYPT 1997. LNCS, vol. 1233, pp. 465–479. Springer, Heidelberg (1997). https://doi.org/10.1007/3-540-69053-0_32

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  18. Camenisch, J., Damgård, I.: Verifiable encryption, group encryption, and their applications to separable group signatures and signature sharing schemes. In: Okamoto, T. (ed.) ASIACRYPT 2000. LNCS, vol. 1976, pp. 331–345. Springer, Heidelberg (2000). https://doi.org/10.1007/3-540-44448-3_25

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  19. Camenisch, J., Shoup, V.: Practical verifiable encryption and decryption of discrete logarithms. In: Boneh, D. (ed.) CRYPTO 2003. LNCS, vol. 2729, pp. 126–144. Springer, Heidelberg (2003). https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-540-45146-4_8

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  20. Castryck, W., Lange, T., Martindale, C., Panny, L., Renes, J.: CSIDH: an efficient post-quantum commutative group action. In: Peyrin, T., Galbraith, S. (eds.) ASIACRYPT 2018. LNCS, vol. 11274, pp. 395–427. Springer, Cham (2018). https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-03332-3_15

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  21. Chase, M., Lysyanskaya, A.: On signatures of knowledge. In: Dwork, C. (ed.) CRYPTO 2006. LNCS, vol. 4117, pp. 78–96. Springer, Heidelberg (2006). https://doi.org/10.1007/11818175_5

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  22. Chaum, D., van Heyst, E.: Group signatures. In: Davies, D.W. (ed.) EUROCRYPT 1991. LNCS, vol. 547, pp. 257–265. Springer, Heidelberg (1991). https://doi.org/10.1007/3-540-46416-6_22

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  23. Clarisse, R., Sanders, O.: Group signature without random oracles from randomizable signatures. In: Nguyen, K., Wu, W., Lam, K.Y., Wang, H. (eds.) ProvSec 2020. LNCS, vol. 12505, pp. 3–23. Springer, Cham (2020). https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-62576-4_1

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  24. Cramer, R., Shoup, V.: A practical public key cryptosystem provably secure against adaptive chosen ciphertext attack. In: Krawczyk, H. (ed.) CRYPTO 1998. LNCS, vol. 1462, pp. 13–25. Springer, Heidelberg (1998). https://doi.org/10.1007/BFb0055717

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  25. del Pino, R., Lyubashevsky, V., Seiler, G.: Lattice-based group signatures and zero-knowledge proofs of automorphism stability. In: ACM CCS 2018, pp. 574–591 (2018)

    Google Scholar 

  26. Delerablée, C., Pointcheval, D.: Dynamic fully anonymous short group signatures. In: Nguyen, P.Q. (ed.) VIETCRYPT 2006. LNCS, vol. 4341, pp. 193–210. Springer, Heidelberg (2006). https://doi.org/10.1007/11958239_13

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  27. Derler, D., Slamanig, D.: Highly-efficient fully-anonymous dynamic group signatures. In: ASIACCS 2018, pp. 551–565 (2018)

    Google Scholar 

  28. El Kaafarani, A., Katsumata, S., Pintore, F.: Lossy CSI-FiSh: efficient signature scheme with tight reduction to decisional CSIDH-512. In: Kiayias, A., Kohlweiss, M., Wallden, P., Zikas, V. (eds.) PKC 2020. LNCS, vol. 12111, pp. 157–186. Springer, Cham (2020). https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-45388-6_6

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  29. Esgin, M.F., Nguyen, N.K., Seiler, G.: Practical exact proofs from lattices: new techniques to exploit fully-splitting rings. In: Moriai, S., Wang, H. (eds.) ASIACRYPT 2020. LNCS, vol. 12492, pp. 259–288. Springer, Cham (2020). https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-64834-3_9

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  30. Esgin, M.F., Steinfeld, R., Liu, J.K., Liu, D.: Lattice-based zero-knowledge proofs: new techniques for shorter and faster constructions and applications. In: Boldyreva, A., Micciancio, D. (eds.) CRYPTO 2019. LNCS, vol. 11692, pp. 115–146. Springer, Cham (2019). https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-26948-7_5

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  31. Esgin, M.F., Steinfeld, R., Zhao, R.K.: Matrict+: more efficient post-quantum private blockchain payments. Cryptology ePrint Archive, Report 2021/545

    Google Scholar 

  32. Esgin, M.F., Zhao, R.K., Steinfeld, R., Liu, J.K., Liu, D.: MatRiCT: efficient, scalable and post-quantum blockchain confidential transactions protocol. In: ACM CCS 2019, pp. 567–584 (2019)

    Google Scholar 

  33. Ezerman, M.F., Lee, H.T., Ling, S., Nguyen, K., Wang, H.: A provably secure group signature scheme from code-based assumptions. In: Iwata, T., Cheon, J.H. (eds.) ASIACRYPT 2015. LNCS, vol. 9452, pp. 260–285. Springer, Heidelberg (2015). https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-662-48797-6_12

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  34. Fiat, A., Shamir, A.: How to prove yourself: practical solutions to identification and signature problems. In: Odlyzko, A.M. (ed.) CRYPTO 1986. LNCS, vol. 263, pp. 186–194. Springer, Heidelberg (1987). https://doi.org/10.1007/3-540-47721-7_12

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  35. Fischlin, M.: Communication-efficient non-interactive proofs of knowledge with online extractors. In: Shoup, V. (ed.) CRYPTO 2005. LNCS, vol. 3621, pp. 152–168. Springer, Heidelberg (2005). https://doi.org/10.1007/11535218_10

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  36. Fischlin, M., Harasser, P., Janson, C.: Signatures from sequential-OR proofs. In: Canteaut, A., Ishai, Y. (eds.) EUROCRYPT 2020. LNCS, vol. 12107, pp. 212–244. Springer, Cham (2020). https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-45727-3_8

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  37. Fujisaki, E., Okamoto, T.: Secure integration of asymmetric and symmetric encryption schemes. In: Wiener, M. (ed.) CRYPTO 1999. LNCS, vol. 1666, pp. 537–554. Springer, Heidelberg (1999). https://doi.org/10.1007/3-540-48405-1_34

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  38. Furukawa, J., Imai, H.: An efficient group signature scheme from bilinear maps. IEICE Trans. Fundam. Electron. Commun. Comput. Sci. 89(5), 1328–1338 (2006)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  39. Gordon, S.D., Katz, J., Vaikuntanathan, V.: A group signature scheme from lattice assumptions. In: Abe, M. (ed.) ASIACRYPT 2010. LNCS, vol. 6477, pp. 395–412. Springer, Heidelberg (2010). https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-642-17373-8_23

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  40. Groth, J.: Fully anonymous group signatures without random oracles. In: Kurosawa, K. (ed.) ASIACRYPT 2007. LNCS, vol. 4833, pp. 164–180. Springer, Heidelberg (2007). https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-540-76900-2_10

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  41. Katsumata, S., Yamada, S.: Group signatures without NIZK: from lattices in the standard model. In: Ishai, Y., Rijmen, V. (eds.) EUROCRYPT 2019. LNCS, vol. 11478, pp. 312–344. Springer, Cham (2019). https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-17659-4_11

    Chapter  MATH  Google Scholar 

  42. Katz, J., Kolesnikov, V., Wang, X.: Improved non-interactive zero knowledge with applications to post-quantum signatures. In: ACM CCS 2018, pp. 525–537 (2018)

    Google Scholar 

  43. Katz, J., Wang, N.: Efficiency improvements for signature schemes with tight security reductions. In: ACM CCS 2003, pp. 155–164 (2003)

    Google Scholar 

  44. Kumawat, S., Paul, S.: A new constant-size accountable ring signature scheme without random oracles. In: Chen, X., Lin, D., Yung, M. (eds.) Inscrypt 2017. LNCS, vol. 10726, pp. 157–179. Springer, Cham (2018). https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-75160-3_11

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  45. Laguillaumie, F., Langlois, A., Libert, B., Stehlé, D.: Lattice-based group signatures with logarithmic signature size. In: Sako, K., Sarkar, P. (eds.) ASIACRYPT 2013. LNCS, vol. 8270, pp. 41–61. Springer, Heidelberg (2013). https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-642-42045-0_3

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  46. Lai, R.W.F., Zhang, T., Chow, S.S.M., Schröder, D.: Efficient sanitizable signatures without random oracles. In: Askoxylakis, I., Ioannidis, S., Katsikas, S., Meadows, C. (eds.) ESORICS 2016. LNCS, vol. 9878, pp. 363–380. Springer, Cham (2016). https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-45744-4_18

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  47. Libert, B., Ling, S., Nguyen, K., Wang, H.: Zero-knowledge arguments for lattice-based accumulators: logarithmic-size ring signatures and group signatures without trapdoors. In: Fischlin, M., Coron, J.-S. (eds.) EUROCRYPT 2016. LNCS, vol. 9666, pp. 1–31. Springer, Heidelberg (2016). https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-662-49896-5_1

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  48. Libert, B., Mouhartem, F., Peters, T., Yung, M.: Practical “signatures with efficient protocols” from simple assumptions. In: ASIACCS 2016, pp. 511–522 (2016)

    Google Scholar 

  49. Libert, B., Peters, T., Yung, M.: Short group signatures via structure-preserving signatures: standard model security from simple assumptions. In: Gennaro, R., Robshaw, M. (eds.) CRYPTO 2015. LNCS, vol. 9216, pp. 296–316. Springer, Heidelberg (2015). https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-662-48000-7_15

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  50. Ling, S., Nguyen, K., Wang, H., Xu, Y.: Constant-size group signatures from lattices. In: Abdalla, M., Dahab, R. (eds.) PKC 2018. LNCS, vol. 10770, pp. 58–88. Springer, Cham (2018). https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-76581-5_3

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  51. Lyubashevsky, V., Nguyen, N.K., Seiler, G.: Practical lattice-based zero-knowledge proofs for integer relations. In: ACM CCS 2020, pp. 1051–1070 (2020)

    Google Scholar 

  52. Lyubashevsky, V., Nguyen, N.K., Seiler, G.: SMILE: set membership from ideal lattices with applications to ring signatures and confidential transactions. In: Malkin, T., Peikert, C. (eds.) CRYPTO 2021. LNCS, vol. 12826, pp. 611–640. Springer, Cham (2021). https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-84245-1_21

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  53. Peikert, C.: He gives C-Sieves on the CSIDH. In: Canteaut, A., Ishai, Y. (eds.) EUROCRYPT 2020. LNCS, vol. 12106, pp. 463–492. Springer, Cham (2020). https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-45724-2_16

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  54. Pointcheval, D., Stern, J.: Security arguments for digital signatures and blind signatures. J. Cryptol. 13(3), 361–396 (2000)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  55. Rivest, R.L., Shamir, A., Tauman, Y.: How to leak a secret. In: Boyd, C. (ed.) ASIACRYPT 2001. LNCS, vol. 2248, pp. 552–565. Springer, Heidelberg (2001). https://doi.org/10.1007/3-540-45682-1_32

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  56. Unruh, D.: Non-interactive zero-knowledge proofs in the quantum random oracle model. In: Oswald, E., Fischlin, M. (eds.) EUROCRYPT 2015. LNCS, vol. 9057, pp. 755–784. Springer, Heidelberg (2015). https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-662-46803-6_25

    Chapter  MATH  Google Scholar 

  57. Xu, S., Yung, M.: Accountable ring signatures: a smart card approach. In: Quisquater, J.-J., Paradinas, P., Deswarte, Y., El Kalam, A.A. (eds.) CARDIS 2004. IIFIP, vol. 153, pp. 271–286. Springer, Boston (2004). https://doi.org/10.1007/1-4020-8147-2_18

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  58. Yang, R., Au, M.H., Zhang, Z., Xu, Q., Yu, Z., Whyte, W.: Efficient lattice-based zero-knowledge arguments with standard soundness: construction and applications. In: Boldyreva, A., Micciancio, D. (eds.) CRYPTO 2019. LNCS, vol. 11692, pp. 147–175. Springer, Cham (2019). https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-26948-7_6

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgements

Yi-Fu Lai was supported by the Ministry for Business, Innovation and Employment in New Zealand. Shuichi Katsumata was supported by JST CREST Grant Number JPMJCR19F6, Japan. This work was supported by CyberSecurity Research Flanders with reference number VR20192203, and in part by the Research Council KU Leuven grant C14/18/067 on Cryptanalysis of post-quantum cryptography. Ward Beullens is funded by FWO Junior Postdoc- toral Fellowship 1S95620N.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. imec-COSIC, KU Leuven, Leuven, Belgium

    Ward Beullens

  2. IBM Research, Zurich, Switzerland

    Ward Beullens

  3. University of Auckland, Auckland, New Zealand

    Samuel Dobson & Yi-Fu Lai

  4. National Institute of Advanced Industrial Science and Technology (AIST), Tokyo, Japan

    Shuichi Katsumata

  5. Department of Mathematics, University of Bari, Bari, Italy

    Federico Pintore

Authors
  1. Ward Beullens
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Samuel Dobson
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Shuichi Katsumata
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  4. Yi-Fu Lai
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  5. Federico Pintore
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Shuichi Katsumata .

Editor information

Editors and Affiliations

  1. University of Haifa, Haifa, Haifa, Israel

    Orr Dunkelman

  2. University of Warsaw, Warsaw, Poland

    Stefan Dziembowski

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2022 International Association for Cryptologic Research

About this paper

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this paper

Beullens, W., Dobson, S., Katsumata, S., Lai, YF., Pintore, F. (2022). Group Signatures and More from Isogenies and Lattices: Generic, Simple, and Efficient. In: Dunkelman, O., Dziembowski, S. (eds) Advances in Cryptology – EUROCRYPT 2022. EUROCRYPT 2022. Lecture Notes in Computer Science, vol 13276. Springer, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-031-07085-3_4

Download citation

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-031-07085-3_4

  • Published:

  • Publisher Name: Springer, Cham

  • Print ISBN: 978-3-031-07084-6

  • Online ISBN: 978-3-031-07085-3

  • eBook Packages: Computer ScienceComputer Science (R0)

Publish with us

Policies and ethics

Societies and partnerships

Search

Navigation