2005
DOI: 10.1007/978-3-540-30574-3_11
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Foundations of Group Signatures: The Case of Dynamic Groups

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
2
1
1
1

Citation Types

1
500
0
4

Year Published

2006
2006
2023
2023

Publication Types

Select...
3
3
3

Relationship

0
9

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 382 publications
(505 citation statements)
references
References 19 publications
1
500
0
4
Order By: Relevance
“…Here the coalition resistance is the following property: an adversary, not colluding with the GM, cannot obtain a member public key/private key pair not generated in the joining protocols with the GM. It is well known that a secure group signature scheme satisfies the coalition resistance property [BMW03,BSZ05]. Hence, the Furukawa-Imai scheme (and therefore our first scheme) satisfies this property.…”
Section: Sketch Of the Security Proofmentioning
confidence: 80%
“…Here the coalition resistance is the following property: an adversary, not colluding with the GM, cannot obtain a member public key/private key pair not generated in the joining protocols with the GM. It is well known that a secure group signature scheme satisfies the coalition resistance property [BMW03,BSZ05]. Hence, the Furukawa-Imai scheme (and therefore our first scheme) satisfies this property.…”
Section: Sketch Of the Security Proofmentioning
confidence: 80%
“…This satisfies the correctness, full anonymity and full traceability. Later, a group signature scheme for groups with dynamic membership got developed in [13].This paper also discuss about strong formal definitions of security and construction, proven secure under general assumptions. This paper also discuss about different trust levels and the identity privacy of signers and also about traceability.…”
Section: Related Workmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…However, the model of [BMW03] does not consider the possibility of a (long-lived) group master, which could act as a potential framer. To address this problem and achieve the notion of strong exculpability, introduced in [ACJT00] and formalized in [KY04,BSZ05], one would need an interactive enrollment protocol, call Join, at the end of which only the user himself knows his full private key. We do not further consider exculpability issues in this paper.…”
Section: It Is Noted In [Bmw03] That This Property Implies That Of Exmentioning
confidence: 99%