QUANT-PHMar 16, 2021
Tight Bounds for Inverting Permutations via Compressed Oracle ArgumentsAnsis Rosmanis
In his seminal work on recording quantum queries [Crypto 2019], Zhandry studied interactions between quantum query algorithms and the quantum oracle corresponding to random functions. Zhandry presented a framework for interpreting various states in the quantum space of the oracle as databases of the knowledge acquired by the algorithm and used that interpretation to provide security proofs in post-quantum cryptography. In this paper, we introduce a similar interpretation for the case when the oracle corresponds to random permutations instead of random functions. Because both random functions and random permutations are highly significant in security proofs, we hope that the present framework will find applications in quantum cryptography. Additionally, we show how this framework can be used to prove that the success probability for a k-query quantum algorithm that attempts to invert a random N-element permutation is at most O(k^2/N).
DSJul 11, 2019
Quantum and Classical Algorithms for Approximate Submodular Function MinimizationYassine Hamoudi, Patrick Rebentrost, Ansis Rosmanis et al.
Submodular functions are set functions mapping every subset of some ground set of size $n$ into the real numbers and satisfying the diminishing returns property. Submodular minimization is an important field in discrete optimization theory due to its relevance for various branches of mathematics, computer science and economics. The currently fastest strongly polynomial algorithm for exact minimization [LSW15] runs in time $\widetilde{O}(n^3 \cdot \mathrm{EO} + n^4)$ where $\mathrm{EO}$ denotes the cost to evaluate the function on any set. For functions with range $[-1,1]$, the best $ε$-additive approximation algorithm [CLSW17] runs in time $\widetilde{O}(n^{5/3}/ε^{2} \cdot \mathrm{EO})$. In this paper we present a classical and a quantum algorithm for approximate submodular minimization. Our classical result improves on the algorithm of [CLSW17] and runs in time $\widetilde{O}(n^{3/2}/ε^2 \cdot \mathrm{EO})$. Our quantum algorithm is, up to our knowledge, the first attempt to use quantum computing for submodular optimization. The algorithm runs in time $\widetilde{O}(n^{5/4}/ε^{5/2} \cdot \log(1/ε) \cdot \mathrm{EO})$. The main ingredient of the quantum result is a new method for sampling with high probability $T$ independent elements from any discrete probability distribution of support size $n$ in time $O(\sqrt{Tn})$. Previous quantum algorithms for this problem were of complexity $O(T\sqrt{n})$.
QUANT-PHApr 28, 2014
Quantum Attacks on Classical Proof Systems - The Hardness of Quantum RewindingAndris Ambainis, Ansis Rosmanis, Dominique Unruh
Quantum zero-knowledge proofs and quantum proofs of knowledge are inherently difficult to analyze because their security analysis uses rewinding. Certain cases of quantum rewinding are handled by the results by Watrous (SIAM J Comput, 2009) and Unruh (Eurocrypt 2012), yet in general the problem remains elusive. We show that this is not only due to a lack of proof techniques: relative to an oracle, we show that classically secure proofs and proofs of knowledge are insecure in the quantum setting. More specifically, sigma-protocols, the Fiat-Shamir construction, and Fischlin's proof system are quantum insecure under assumptions that are sufficient for classical security. Additionally, we show that for similar reasons, computationally binding commitments provide almost no security guarantees in a quantum setting. To show these results, we develop the "pick-one trick", a general technique that allows an adversary to find one value satisfying a given predicate, but not two.