English (United Kingdom)

https://curated-unify.zendy.io/wp-json/zendy-region/v1/featured_content/oa?rat=en

https://curated-unify.zendy.io/wp-json/zendy-region/v1/highlighted_journal/

Global: Zendy Plus annual

Presents the access of premium content as premium feature

Premium Content

Presents the keyphrase highlighting as premium feature

Keyphrase Highlighting

Presents the summarisation as premium feature

Summarisation

Insights

Presents the pdf analysis as premium feature

PDF Analysis

Presents the zaia usage as premium feature

ZAIA

Global: Zendy Tools annual

Global: Zendy Free Plan

Global: Zendy Tools monthly

Global: Zendy Plus monthly

First, we introduce the notion of divertibility as a proto- col property as opposed to the existing notion as a language property (see Okamoto, Ohta (OO90)). We give a definition of protocol divertibil- ity that applies to arbitrary 2-party protocols and is compatible with Okamoto and Ohta's definition in the case of interactive zero-knowledge proofs. Other important examples falling under the newdefinition are blind signature protocols. We propose a sufficiency criterion for divertibil- ity that is satisfied by many existing protocols and which, surprisingly, generalizes to cover several protocols not normally associated with di- vertibility (e.g., Diffie-Hellman key exchange). Next, we introduce atomic proxy cryptography, in which an atomic proxy function, in conjunction with a public proxy key, converts ciphertexts (messages or signatures) for one key into ciphertexts for another. Proxy keys, once generated, may be made public and proxy functions applied in untrusted environments. We present atomic proxy functions for discrete-log-based encryption, iden- tification, and signature schemes. It is not clear whether atomic proxy functions exist in general for all public-key cryptosystems. Finally, we discuss the relationship between divertibility and proxy cryptography.

Divertible protocols and atomic proxy cryptography