MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2966457083

On MILP-Based Automatic Search for Differential Trails Through Modular Additions with Application to Bel-T.

2019· preprint· en· W2966457083 on OpenAlexaff
Muhammad ElSheikh, Ahmed Abdelkhalek, Amr Youssef

Bibliographic record

VenueIACR Cryptology ePrint Archive · 2019
Typepreprint
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicCryptographic Implementations and Security
Canadian institutionsConcordia University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsBlock cipherModular designDifferential (mechanical device)Computer scienceAlgorithmInteger (computer science)CipherLookup tableMathematicsArithmeticEncryptionCryptographyProgramming language
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Using modular addition as a source of nonlinearity is frequently used in many symmetric-key structures such as ARX and Lai–Massey schemes. At FSE’16, Fu et al. proposed a Mixed Integer Linear Programming (MILP)-based method to handle the propagation of differential trails through modular additions assuming that the two inputs to the modular addition and the consecutive rounds are independent. However, this assumption does not necessarily hold. In this paper, we study the propagation of the XOR difference through the modular addition at the bit level and show the effect of the carry bit. Then, we propose a more accurate MILP model to describe the differential propagation through the modular addition taking into account the dependency between the consecutive modular additions. The proposed MILP model is utilized to launch a differential attack against Bel-T-256, which is a member of the Bel-T block cipher family that has been adopted recently as a national standard of the Republic of Belarus. In particular, we employ the concept of partial Differential Distribution Table to model the 8-bit S-Box of Bel-T using a MILP approach in order to automate finding a differential characteristic of the cipher. Then, we present a \(4\frac{1}{7}\)-round (out of 8) differential attack which utilizes a 3-round differential characteristic that holds with probability \(2^{-111}\). The data, time and memory complexities of the attack are \(2^{114}\) chosen plaintexts, \( 2^{237.14} \) \(4\frac{1}{7}\)-round encryptions, and \(2^{224}\) 128-bit blocks, respectively.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: Theoretical or conceptual
GenreCandidate signal: Methods · Consensus signal: Methods
Teacher disagreement score0.351
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.022
GPT teacher head0.306
Teacher spread0.284 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.

Study designTheoretical or conceptual
Domainnot available
GenreMethods

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations0
Published2019
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueIACR Cryptology ePrint ArchiveSame topicCryptographic Implementations and SecurityFrench-language works237,207