Grading
| HW1 | S1 | HW2 | S2 | HW3 | S3 | HW4 | S4 | HW5 | S5 | HW6 | HW7 | S7 | HW8 | Sum | % | |
| Ivo | 1.0 | 0.0 | 1.0 | 0.0 | 0.5 | 0.0 | 1.0 | 0.0 | 1.0 | 0.0 | 1.0 | 1.0 | 0.0 | 1.0 | 7.7 | 94% |
| Filipp | 0.5 | 0.0 | 1.0 | 0.0 | 0.5 | 0.0 | 0.5 | 0.0 | 1.0 | 0.0 | 1.0 | 0.5 | 0.0 | 0.5 | 5.5 | 69 % |
| Prastudy | 1.0 | 1.5 | 1.0 | 0.0 | 0.5 | 0.0 | 1.0 | 0.0 | 1.0 | 1.0 | 1.0 | 1.0 | 0.0 | 0.5 | 8.5 | 107% |
First homework
Typeset a short proof similarly to the example provided below
Copy the LaTeX code files into your favourite directory and try to compile it with LaTeX. If this succeeds then modify the corresponding tex file and type in the proof analogously. Send the corresponding LaTeX file together with compiled PDF file to me. The deadline is 20 September 23:59 EET. In case of problems contact me.
Assigmnents
- Ivo: 0104-random-self-reducibility-of-dl.tex
- Filipp: 0105-random-self-reducibility-of-cdh.tex
- Prastudy: 0109-simplified-random-self-reducibility-of-ddh.tex
Star exercises
- Provide the full proof for randomised self-reducibility of DDL
- Prove or disprove that the perfect ability to extract two consecutive bits of DL is sufficient for the full recovery of the DL.
Second homework
Complete the proofs given in the archive file. If the files do not compile add missing style and template files from the archive of files given out for the first exercise.
Assigmnents
- Ivo: 0201-from-expected-running-time-to-strict-running-time.tex.tex
- Filipp: 0203-standard-combiner-contruction.tex
- Prastudy: 0202-amplification-by-majority-voting.tex
Note that I have changed the exercise for Filipp. The change is cosmetic. The original exercise was not meaningful while the new formalisation makes sense. Also in the original exercise advantages of all sub-adversaries where the same, while here they can be different. In terms of proof it does not add any new important details. The same proof still works.
Extra star exercise about malleability
The deadline is 29 September 23:59 EET
Third homework
Complete the proofs given in the archive file. If the files do not compile add missing style and template files from the archive of files given out for the first exercise.
All of you get the same exercise. However, if you are bored then you can try to consider SNM-CCA1 and SNM-CCA2 security notions instead of SNM-CPA.
The deadline is 6 October 23:59 EET
Fourth homework
Complete the proofs given in the archive file. If the files do not compile add missing style and template files from the archive of files given out for the first exercise.
The deadline is 25 October 23:59 EET
Fifth homework
Complete the proofs given in the archive file. If the files do not compile add missing style and template files from the archive of files given out for the first exercise.
The deadline is 29 October 23:59 EET
The star exercise is the more precise analysis of the 2PRE => OW reduction, see the archive file
The deadline is 2 November 23:59 EET
Sixth homework
Complete the proofs given in the archive file. If the files do not compile add missing style and template files from the archive of files given out for the first exercise.
The deadline is 17 November 23:59 EET
Seventh homework
Complete the proofs given in the archive file. If the files do not compile add missing style and template files from the archive of files given out for the first exercise.
The deadline is 24 November 23:59 EET
Eight homework
Complete the proofs given in the archive file. If the files do not compile add missing style and template files from the archive of files given out for the first exercise.
The deadline is 8 December 23:59 EET