1

I learned about probabilistic polynomial time adversary, but I have some doubt.

  • Is probabilistic polynomial time adversary referred to those who attack in polynomial time with the form of probabilistic?
kelalaka
  • 48,443
  • 11
  • 116
  • 196
Hewan
  • 31
  • 1
  • 2

1 Answers1

3

Yes, but note as below, the probability is not biased.

From the Lindell, Katz book;

An algorithm $A$ is said to run in polynomial time if there exists a polynomial $p(\cdot)$ such that for every input $x \in \{0,1\}^*$, the computation of $A(x)$ terminates within at most $p(|x|)$ steps.

A probabilistic algorithm is one that has the capability of "tossing coins", i.e. the algorithm has access to a random source of randomness that yields unbiased random bits that are independently equal to 1 with $1/2$ probability and to 0 with $1/2$ probability.

Probabilistic Polynomial-time adversary means; An adversary runs in probabilistic polynomial time algorithm.


Different formulation (due to a comment of SEJPM):

  • A probabilistic polynomial-time algorithm is a probabilistic algorithm that may only perform a polynomial amount of operations including at most a polynomial number of coin-flips.
  • A probabilistic polynomial-time adversary is then any probabilistic polynomial-time algorithm.
kelalaka
  • 48,443
  • 11
  • 116
  • 196
  • 3
    Different formulation: A probabilistic polynomial-time algorithm is a probabilistic algorithm that may only perform a polynomial amount of operations including at most a polynomial number of coin-flips. A probabilistic polynomial-time adversary is then any probabilistic polynomial-time algorithm. – SEJPM Oct 09 '18 at 06:49
  • 3
    You should mention that it's a polynomial in the length of the algorithms input. Otherwise the bound on the number of steps is ill defined. – Maeher Oct 09 '18 at 07:10
  • 1
    @SEJPM The difference is immaterial, though. Even if you allow an unbounded number of coin tosses, this does not give the adversary more power because it cannot "use" more than a polynomial number of them. – fkraiem Oct 09 '18 at 12:27