Jump to content

Talk:Hard-core predicate

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
The printable version is no longer supported and may have rendering errors. Please update your browser bookmarks and please use the default browser print function instead.

Recent Discoveries

There's a new paper The security of all RSA and discrete log bits whose abstract states that:

  • all bits of RSA and discrete log are hard core
  • every block of log |x| bits is simultaneously hard core

which is very relevant and very exciting; I haven't read the paper yet; the article needs to be updated. Arvindn 07:35, 18 Nov 2004 (UTC)

Yep, this has actually been known for awhile, it's just now appearing in journal form. I can try to take a crack at some point in the near future. --Chris Peikert 20:36, 18 Nov 2004 (UTC)

This question concerns blackbox one-way functions and computable one-way functions. [I use slightly different notation - is used to indicate the hard-core predicate instead of ]

Let be a length-preserving one-way function, and

Let be the hardcore predicate of .

Due to the Goldreich-Levin theorem, such a hardcore predicate exists for all length-preserving one-way functions.

We define the probabilities

and

Here: represents the algorithm for computing}

represents a blackbox for computing

is a finite length string chosen uniformly from , and

is any PPT algorithm.

The Goldreich-Levin theorem says that if is one-way, then for all algorithms , the probability is negligible function of . Thus, is also a negligible function of .

However, the Goldreich-Levin theorem does not say anything about the ratio .

My question: Is a negligible function of too? According to my logic, should be close to , and should be independent of .

Observation: If then having access to the algorithm of does not give any additional advantage over having blackbox access to (in computing the hard-core predicate)