From Worst to Average Case to Incremental Search Bounds of the Strong Lucas Test
June 07, 2024 Β· Declared Dead Β· π International Conference on Number-Theoretic Methods in Cryptology
"No code URL or promise found in abstract"
Evidence collected by the PWNC Scanner
Authors
Semira Einsele, Gerhard Wunder
arXiv ID
2406.04718
Category
cs.CR: Cryptography & Security
Cross-listed
math.NT
Citations
2
Venue
International Conference on Number-Theoretic Methods in Cryptology
Last Checked
4 months ago
Abstract
The strong Lucas test is a widely used probabilistic primality test in cryptographic libraries. When combined with the Miller-Rabin primality test, it forms the Baillie-PSW primality test, known for its absence of false positives, undermining the relevance of a complete understanding of the strong Lucas test. In primality testing, the worst-case error probability serves as an upper bound on the likelihood of incorrectly identifying a composite as prime. For the strong Lucas test, this bound is $4/15$ for odd composites, not products of twin primes. On the other hand, the average-case error probability indicates the probability that a randomly chosen integer is inaccurately classified as prime by the test. This bound is especially important for practical applications, where we test primes that are randomly generated and not generated by an adversary. The error probability of $4/15$ does not directly carry over due to the scarcity of primes, and whether this estimate holds has not yet been established in the literature. This paper addresses this gap by demonstrating that an integer passing $t$ consecutive test rounds, alongside additional standard tests of low computational cost, is indeed prime with a probability greater than $1-(4/15)^t$ for all $t\geq 1$. Furthermore, we introduce error bounds for the incremental search algorithm based on the strong Lucas test, as there are no established bounds up to date as well. Rather than independent selection, in this approach, the candidate is chosen uniformly at random, with subsequent candidates determined by incrementally adding 2. This modification reduces the need for random bits and enhances the efficiency of trial division computation further.
Community Contributions
Found the code? Know the venue? Think something is wrong? Let us know!
π Similar Papers
In the same crypt β Cryptography & Security
R.I.P.
π»
Ghosted
R.I.P.
π»
Ghosted
The Limitations of Deep Learning in Adversarial Settings
R.I.P.
π»
Ghosted
Distillation as a Defense to Adversarial Perturbations against Deep Neural Networks
R.I.P.
π»
Ghosted
Spectre Attacks: Exploiting Speculative Execution
R.I.P.
π»
Ghosted
How To Backdoor Federated Learning
R.I.P.
π»
Ghosted
Evasion Attacks against Machine Learning at Test Time
Died the same way β π» Ghosted
R.I.P.
π»
Ghosted
Federated Learning: Strategies for Improving Communication Efficiency
R.I.P.
π»
Ghosted
In-Datacenter Performance Analysis of a Tensor Processing Unit
R.I.P.
π»
Ghosted
Deep Convolutional Neural Networks for Computer-Aided Detection: CNN Architectures, Dataset Characteristics and Transfer Learning
R.I.P.
π»
Ghosted