Content deleted Content added
mNo edit summary |
→Limitations: the examples are not simply pathological, they are truly contrived |
||
Line 26:
According to the [[Church–Turing thesis]], no function [[Computable function|computable]] by a finite algorithm can implement a true random oracle (which by definition requires an infinite description because it has infinitely many possible inputs, and its outputs are all independent from each other and need to be individually specified by any description).
In fact, certain
In general, if a protocol is proven secure, attacks to that protocol must either be outside what was proven, or break one of the assumptions in the proof; for instance if the proof relies on the hardness of [[integer factorization]], to break this assumption one must discover a fast integer factorization algorithm. Instead, to break the random oracle assumption, one must discover some unknown and undesirable property of the actual hash function; for good hash functions where such properties are believed unlikely, the considered protocol can be considered secure.
|