Fiat-Shamir for Proofs Lacks a Proof Even in the Presence of Shared Entanglement
Bibliographic record
Abstract
We explore the cryptographic power of arbitrary shared physical resources. The most general such resource is access to a fresh entangled quantum state at the outset of each protocol execution. We call this the Common Reference Quantum State (CRQS) model, in analogy to the well-known Common Reference String (CRS) . The CRQS model is a natural generalization of the CRS model but appears to be more powerful: in the two-party setting, a CRQS can sometimes exhibit properties associated with a Random Oracle queried once by measuring a maximally entangled state in one of many mutually unbiased bases. We formalize this notion as a Weak One-Time Random Oracle (WOTRO) , where we only ask of the m -bit output to have some randomness when conditioned on the n -bit input.We show that when n−m∈ω(lgn) , any protocol for WOTRO in the CRQS model can be attacked by an (inefficient) adversary. Moreover, our adversary is efficiently simulatable, which rules out the possibility of proving the computational security of a scheme by a fully black-box reduction to a cryptographic game assumption. On the other hand, we introduce a non-game quantum assumption for hash functions that implies WOTRO in the CRQS model (where the CRQS consists only of EPR pairs). We first build a statistically secure WOTRO protocol where m=n , then hash the output.The impossibility of WOTRO has the following consequences. First, we show the fully-black-box impossibility of a quantum Fiat-Shamir transform, extending the impossibility result of Bitansky et al. (TCC 2013) to the CRQS model. Second, we show a fully-black-box impossibility result for a strenghtened version of quantum lightning (Zhandry, Eurocrypt 2019) where quantum bolts have an additional parameter that cannot be changed without generating new bolts. Our results also apply to 2 -message protocols in the plain model.
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 machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.018 | 0.058 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.002 | 0.005 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.003 | 0.003 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.005 | 0.015 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.008 | 0.039 |
| Open science | 0.004 | 0.012 |
| Research integrity | 0.007 | 0.016 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.018 | 0.005 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".