Score:0

Why s=0 is not allowed in Elgamal signature?

at flag

In Elgamal signature scheme $\text{sig}_{k_{pr}}(x,k_E)=(r,s)$, $s=0$ is not allowed. How does this lead to finding the private key $d$?

kelalaka avatar
in flag
Did you check that the signature can be verifiable?
Mohammadsadeq Borjiyan avatar
at flag
Thanks. For verification we should have $\beta^r.r^s \bmod p=\alpha^x$, which in this particular case leads to $\alpha^{d.r+0}\neq \alpha^x$. And using hash functions will not solve this problem, is it true?
kelalaka avatar
in flag
The $m$ should be already the hash of the message, otherwise, the signature space will be limited. I couldn't find a dupe for this. If you want you can write an answer to your question.
Mohammadsadeq Borjiyan avatar
at flag
Thanks dear Henry.
Score:0
at flag

For $s=0$, we will have problem verifying the signature. For verification, we should have $\beta^r \cdot r^s=\alpha^x$. This special case, $s=0$, leads to $\beta^r \cdot r^0=\beta^r=\alpha^{d \cdot r}$ which must be equal to $\alpha^x$, i.e. $d \cdot r=x$, but $d \cdot r$ is equal for every $x$ and this have no meaning.

kelalaka avatar
in flag
That is more than that. $r$ is public in the signature, then you find the $d$ :)
mangohost

Post an answer

Most people don’t grasp that asking a lot of questions unlocks learning and improves interpersonal bonding. In Alison’s studies, for example, though people could accurately recall how many questions had been asked in their conversations, they didn’t intuit the link between questions and liking. Across four studies, in which participants were engaged in conversations themselves or read transcripts of others’ conversations, people tended not to realize that question asking would influence—or had influenced—the level of amity between the conversationalists.