Pinned
Looking to learn about lattice-based cryptography? Check out my tutorial and survey: web.eecs.umich.edu/~cpeikert/pubs…
Chris Peikert
2,134 posts
Chris Peikert
@ChrisPeikert
Cryptographer (lattices/post-quantum), Professor @UMichCSE, CS(cientific)O @AlgorandFoundation, PhD @MIT_CSAIL. Previously @gatech_scs. Here I speak for myself.
- Really excited that State Proofs are live on @Algorand MainNet! This is a major accomplishment across the cryptography research, engineering, and product teams. Great work by all—and this is just the beginning!1/ Major Protocol Upgrade: Now live on #Algorand MainNet, the release introduces State Proofs for trustless cross-chain communication and 5x faster performance 👉 prnewswire.com/news-releases/…
- A̶s̶s̶o̶c̶i̶a̶t̶e̶ Professor regents.umich.edu/files/meetings…
- Feel like it’s being lost that he has *already ordered* the *actual displacement* of more than 59,000 people who: — are already here legally, — for an average of 13 years, — with >27k US-citizen children, back to “shithole countries.”
- Some personal news: I’m very excited to join @Algorand! We’ll be looking to hire more great postdocs/interns/cryptographers soon. Stay tuned...We are thrilled to welcome @ChrisPeikert to the Algorand team as our Head of Cryptography! A world leader in lattice-based and post-quantum #cryptography, he will be advancing several projects that further improve Algorand’s functionality and performance: ow.ly/vjuw50D1ofL
- 💥New short paper with Yi Tang: We 𝒄𝒐𝒎𝒑𝒍𝒆𝒕𝒆𝒍𝒚 𝒃𝒓𝒆𝒂𝒌 the assumption underlying the lattice-based "proof of sequential work" candidate from CRYPTO'23. This solves a problem that was conjectured to require depth T... in depth poly(log T). web.eecs.umich.edu/~cpeikert/pubs…
- New result with my student Sina Shiehian: LWE => NP ⊆ NIZK It's exciting to finally have closure on this problem, after being tormented by it for (yikes!) 12+ years. web.eecs.umich.edu/~cpeikert/pubs…
- This is a very exciting honor! Thanks to all who found this work useful and built upon it. (The only downside: being old enough to be eligible...) Here is a little behind-the-scenes story from my foggy memory... /1A big congrats to Prof. @ChrisPeikert on his receipt of the Crypto 2023 Test-of-Time Award! The award, given by @IACR_News, recognizes the lasting influence of his research on oblivious transfer protocols and lattice-based encryption. >> myumi.ch/n7b4V
- Wow!! This completely breaks SIDH/SIKE level-1 parameters on a single core in an hour (not even a weekend!). A monumental result. #NISTPQC#ePrint An efficient key recovery attack on SIDH (preliminary version): W Castryck, T Decru ia.cr/2022/975
- New paper, with @huckbennett: a much simpler proof that the Shortest Vector Problem on lattices is NP-hard (via a randomized reduction). tl;dr: Reed-Solomon codes very easily give "locally dense lattices," the key gadgets enabling hardness proofs. web.eecs.umich.edu/~cpeikert/pubs…
- Any serious attempt to attack lattices/LWE that doesn’t change the status quo should increase our confidence in their security.Chen’s paper has a bug, independently discovered by Hongxun Weng and Thomas Vidick, that he doesn’t know how to fix. If I understand correctly, in its current form the paper doesn’t yield any improvement on prior algorithms. eprint.iacr.org/2024/555
- Replying to @mjos_crypto and @Mark_SchultzFor the record: we did consider this very attack. Indeed, we systematically analyzed a *strictly better* attack in a (quite attacker-friendly) quantum time*memory metric. See Section 1.2 of our paper: github.com/algorand/go-su…
- 1/ Since people are wondering about eprint.iacr.org/2021/418: the central claims are incorrect. Indeed, we can even prove that the entire approach cannot possibly work against the targeted Ring-LWE parameters.Can anyone (e.g., @ChrisPeikert) comment on this? Is it correct? Does it impact candidate constructions? Cryptology ePrint Archive: Report 2021/418 - Ring-LWE over two-to-power cyclotomics is not hard eprint.iacr.org/2021/418
