Schnorr identification ⇒ Schnorr signatures (Fiat–Shamir)

Random oracle model · via Fiat–Shamir · AABN02 · security loss: advantage loss factor about for random-oracle queries

Statement

The Schnorr signature scheme is the Fiat–Shamir transform of the Schnorr identification protocol. For a generator of a group of prime order and key pair , signing samples and outputs with , , ; verification checks . The signature is an accepting transcript whose challenge is the hash — Sch91, FS86. The Schnorr protocol’s commitments are uniform in the group, so it is non-trivial, and with a random oracle the Fiat–Shamir transform of a non-trivial identification scheme secure against impersonation under passive attack is EUF-CMA secure; hence Schnorr signatures are EUF-CMA secure in the random-oracle model whenever the Schnorr identification protocol is secure against passive impersonation — AABN02. A direct proof from DLOG goes through the forking lemma (DLOG ⇒ Schnorr signatures) — PS96.

Sketch

The impersonator guesses which random-oracle query the forgery will use, sends that query’s commitment to the honest verifier, and answers the query with the verifier’s challenge. It answers signing queries with transcripts from its passive-attack oracle, programming for each transcript , and replays the forgery’s response, losing a factor about for the guess.

Notes

  • The forking lemma turns a forger with success probability , running time and random-oracle queries into a DLOG solver of expected running time — PS96.
  • That loss is essentially optimal: under OMDL, every algebraic reduction from DLOG to Schnorr forgery in the random-oracle model loses a factor close to in the time-to-success ratio (barrier) — Seu12.
  • The identification protocol is perfectly honest-verifier zero-knowledge unconditionally; DLOG underlies its impersonation resistance — standard.