Improved Reduction from BDD to uSVP · Prior works on BDD to USVP BDD 1 2= USVP BDD 1 = [LM09]...

Preview:

Citation preview

Improved Reduction from BDD to USVP

Shi Bai, Damien Stehle, Weiqiang Wen

Ecole Normale Superieure de Lyon

ICALP, July 15, 2016, Rome, Italy

Bai, Stehle, Wen (ENS Lyon) Improved Reduction from BDD to USVP ICALP’16, Rome, Italy 1 / 28

Bounded Distance Decoding (BDD) and unique Shortest Vector Problem (USVP)

α · λ1

cλ 1 t

s

0

Bounded Distance Decoding for α ≥ 0 (BDDα)

Input: B ∈ Qn×n, a vector t ∈ Qn such that dist(t,L(B)) ≤ α · λ1(B).Output: a lattice vector c ∈ L(B) closest to t.

Bai, Stehle, Wen (ENS Lyon) Improved Reduction from BDD to USVP ICALP’16, Rome, Italy 2 / 28

Bounded Distance Decoding (BDD) and unique Shortest Vector Problem (USVP)

λ 1λ2 =

γ · λ1s1

s2

0

Unique Shortest Vector Problem for γ ≥ 1 (USVPγ)

Input: B ∈ Qn×n such that λ2(L(B)) ≥ γ · λ1(L(B)).Output: a non-zero vector s1 ∈ L(B) of norm λ1(L(B)).

Bai, Stehle, Wen (ENS Lyon) Improved Reduction from BDD to USVP ICALP’16, Rome, Italy 2 / 28

Main result

Improved reduction from BDD to USVP

For 1 ≤ γ ≤ poly(n), we have

BDD1/(√

2γ) ≤ USVPγ .

BDD 1√2γ

USVPγ

Our reduction

Bai, Stehle, Wen (ENS Lyon) Improved Reduction from BDD to USVP ICALP’16, Rome, Italy 3 / 28

Road map

• Background

• The Lyubashevsky and Micciancio reduction and its limitation

• New reduction:• lattice sparsification.• reduction for γ = 1.• sphere packing.

• Open problems

Bai, Stehle, Wen (ENS Lyon) Improved Reduction from BDD to USVP ICALP’16, Rome, Italy 4 / 28

Lattices

b1

b2b1

b2

p1

p2

0

A definition of latticeGiven B = {b1, · · · ,bn} ⊆ Qm a set of linear independent vectors, thelattice L spanned by the b′is is

L(B) ={∑

i∈[n] uibi : u ∈ Zn}.

Bai, Stehle, Wen (ENS Lyon) Improved Reduction from BDD to USVP ICALP’16, Rome, Italy 5 / 28

Lattice Minima

0

Lattice minimumGiven a lattice L, the i-th minimum of L is defined as:

λi(L) = inf{r : dim(span(L ∩ B(0, r))) ≥ i}.

Bai, Stehle, Wen (ENS Lyon) Improved Reduction from BDD to USVP ICALP’16, Rome, Italy 6 / 28

Lattice Minima – first minimum

λ 1

s1

0

Lattice minimumGiven a lattice L, the i-th minimum of L is defined as:

λi(L) = inf{r : dim(span(L ∩ B(0, r))) ≥ i}.

Bai, Stehle, Wen (ENS Lyon) Improved Reduction from BDD to USVP ICALP’16, Rome, Italy 6 / 28

Lattice Minima – second minimum

λ 1 λ2

s1

s2

0

Lattice minimumGiven a lattice L, the i-th minimum of L is defined as:

λi(L) = inf{r : dim(span(L ∩ B(0, r))) ≥ i}.

Bai, Stehle, Wen (ENS Lyon) Improved Reduction from BDD to USVP ICALP’16, Rome, Italy 6 / 28

Why is BDD interesting?

α · λ1

cλ 1 t

s

0

I In cryptography:I Learning With Error (LWE) problem serves as a security foundation.I LWE is an average-case variant of BDD.

I In communication theory – white Gaussian noise channel:I Wifi, mobile phone etc;I View message as a lattice point, Gaussian noise is added in channel

transmission, decoding is solving BDD.

Bai, Stehle, Wen (ENS Lyon) Improved Reduction from BDD to USVP ICALP’16, Rome, Italy 7 / 28

Why is USVP interesting?

λ 1λ2 =

γ · λ1s1

s2

0

I Best known algorithm (especially in practice) for solving BDD is viasolving USVP:

I First, reduce BDD to USVP.I Second, solve USVP by lattice reduction, e.g., LLL and BKZ.

BDD 1poly(n)

and USVPpoly(n) are hard;

Best known algorithm takes exponential time in dimension n.

Bai, Stehle, Wen (ENS Lyon) Improved Reduction from BDD to USVP ICALP’16, Rome, Italy 8 / 28

Why is USVP interesting?

λ 1λ2 =

γ · λ1s1

s2

0

I Best known algorithm (especially in practice) for solving BDD is viasolving USVP:

I First, reduce BDD to USVP.I Second, solve USVP by lattice reduction, e.g., LLL and BKZ.

BDD 1poly(n)

and USVPpoly(n) are hard;

Best known algorithm takes exponential time in dimension n.

Bai, Stehle, Wen (ENS Lyon) Improved Reduction from BDD to USVP ICALP’16, Rome, Italy 8 / 28

Prior works on BDD to USVP

BDD 1α

α = 2γUSVPγ[LM09]

• Slightly improved for some α, Liu et al , 2014; Galbraith; Mic-ciancio, 2015.

[LM09]: V. Lyubashevsky and D. Micciancio. On bounded distance decoding, unique shortest vectors, and the minimum distance problem,CRYPTO, 2009.[LWXZ14]: M. Liu, X. Wang, G. Xu and X. Zheng. A note on BDD problems with λ2-gap. Inf. Process. Lett., 2014.[Ga15]: Private communication, 2015.[Mi15]: Private communication, 2015.

Bai, Stehle, Wen (ENS Lyon) Improved Reduction from BDD to USVP ICALP’16, Rome, Italy 9 / 28

Prior works on BDD to USVP

BDD 1α

α = 2γUSVPγ

BDD 1α

α = γ

[LM09]

There is a factor 2 to be improved.

[LM09]: V. Lyubashevsky and D. Micciancio. On bounded distance decoding, unique shortest vectors, and the minimum distance problem,CRYPTO, 2009.[LWXZ14]: M. Liu, X. Wang, G. Xu and X. Zheng. A note on BDD problems with λ2-gap. Inf. Process. Lett., 2014.[Ga15]: Private communication, 2015.[Mi15]: Private communication, 2015.

Bai, Stehle, Wen (ENS Lyon) Improved Reduction from BDD to USVP ICALP’16, Rome, Italy 9 / 28

Comparison with prior works

0.1

0.2

0.3

0.4

0.5

0.6

0.7

1 1.2 1.4 1.6 1.8 2 2.2 2.4

α

γ

Lyubashevsky and Micciancio, CRYPTO, 2009Liu et al , Inf. Process. Lett., 2014

Folklore (Galbraith; Micciancio)This work

Bai, Stehle, Wen (ENS Lyon) Improved Reduction from BDD to USVP ICALP’16, Rome, Italy 10 / 28

The Lyubashevsky and Micciancio reduction

For any γ ≥ 1, we have

BDD1/(2γ) ≤ USVPγ .

BDD 12γ

USVPγ

[LM09]

[LM09]: V. Lyubashevsky and D. Micciancio. On bounded distance decoding, unique shortest vectors, and the minimum distanceproblem, CRYPTO, 2009.

Bai, Stehle, Wen (ENS Lyon) Improved Reduction from BDD to USVP ICALP’16, Rome, Italy 11 / 28

Lyubashevsky-Micciancio reduction for γ = 1

I BDD1/2 instance: (L(b1), t).

BDD 12γ

B,

t

(n = 1, γ = 1)

b1 2b1

t0 λ1

λ1

2

Bai, Stehle, Wen (ENS Lyon) Improved Reduction from BDD to USVP ICALP’16, Rome, Italy 12 / 28

Lyubashevsky-Micciancio reduction for γ = 1

I Lift vector t into a higher dimension space by λ1(L(b1))/2.

BDD 12γ

B,

t

(n = 1, γ = 1)

b1 2b1

(t, λ1

2 )

t0 λ1

λ1

2

λ1 2

Bai, Stehle, Wen (ENS Lyon) Improved Reduction from BDD to USVP ICALP’16, Rome, Italy 12 / 28

Lyubashevsky-Micciancio reduction for γ = 1

I Kannan embedding.

BDD 12γ

B,

t

(n = 1, γ = 1)

Kannan

embeddingB′

uSVPγ′

B t

0 λ1

(n′ = 2, γ′ = 1)

b1 2b1

(t, λ1

2 )

t0

Bai, Stehle, Wen (ENS Lyon) Improved Reduction from BDD to USVP ICALP’16, Rome, Italy 12 / 28

Lyubashevsky-Micciancio reduction for γ = 1

I We are at the limit: λ′1 = λ′2.

BDD 12γ

B,

t

(n = 1, γ = 1)

Kannan

embeddingB′

uSVPγ′

B t

0 λ1

(n′ = 2, γ′ = 1)

b1 2b1

(t, λ1

2 )

t0 λ1

2

λ1

√2

s1λ1√ 2

s2

Bai, Stehle, Wen (ENS Lyon) Improved Reduction from BDD to USVP ICALP’16, Rome, Italy 12 / 28

This is the best this reduction can achieve

BDD 12

USVP1

(SVP)

[LM09]

Bai, Stehle, Wen (ENS Lyon) Improved Reduction from BDD to USVP ICALP’16, Rome, Italy 13 / 28

Can we improve it?

BDD 12

USVP1

(SVP)

[LM09]

USVP>1

?

Bai, Stehle, Wen (ENS Lyon) Improved Reduction from BDD to USVP ICALP’16, Rome, Italy 14 / 28

An attempt to circumvent the limitation

I Limitation in the Lyubushevsky and Micciancio reduction.

b1 2b1

(t, λ1

2 )

t0 λ1

2

λ1

√2

s1λ1√ 2

s2

Bai, Stehle, Wen (ENS Lyon) Improved Reduction from BDD to USVP ICALP’16, Rome, Italy 15 / 28

An attempt to circumvent the limitation

I A simple deterministic sparsification.

I Lattice L(B) with B = [b1].

0

remove keep

t

b1 2b1

I Lattice L(B) with B = [2b1].

0

remove keep

t

b1 2b1

Bai, Stehle, Wen (ENS Lyon) Improved Reduction from BDD to USVP ICALP’16, Rome, Italy 16 / 28

An attempt to circumvent the limitation

I A simple deterministic sparsification.

I Lattice L(B) with B = [b1].

0

remove keep

t

b1 2b1

I Lattice L(B) with B = [2b1].

0

remove keep

t

b1 2b1

Bai, Stehle, Wen (ENS Lyon) Improved Reduction from BDD to USVP ICALP’16, Rome, Italy 16 / 28

An attempt to circumvent the limitation

I Recall the limitation: λ′2 = λ′1

b1 2b1

(t, λ1

2 )

t0 λ1

2

λ1

√2

s1λ1√ 2

s2

Bai, Stehle, Wen (ENS Lyon) Improved Reduction from BDD to USVP ICALP’16, Rome, Italy 17 / 28

An attempt to circumvent the limitation

I Limitation is circumvented (for this example): λ′2 > λ′1 now!

2b1

(t, λ1

2 )

t0

s1

Bai, Stehle, Wen (ENS Lyon) Improved Reduction from BDD to USVP ICALP’16, Rome, Italy 17 / 28

Main idea

I But we want more...

• keep only 1 closest vector to target t.• remove all other somewhat close N vectors to t.

Bai, Stehle, Wen (ENS Lyon) Improved Reduction from BDD to USVP ICALP’16, Rome, Italy 18 / 28

The main tool: sparsificationKhot’s Lattice Sparsification [K03] (Adapted by [S14])

Input: B ∈ Qn×n.Output: a *shifted* *sparsified* sub-lattice of L(B):

Lp,z + w = {x ∈ L(B) | 〈z,B−1(x− w)〉 = 0 mod p},

where p is a prime integer, z ∈ Znp and w = Bu for u← U(Zn

p).

Orginal lattice in dimension 2

0

p = 5, z = (1,2), w = (1,0)

(2, 2)

0

[K03]: S. Khot. Hardness of approximating the shortest vector problem in high Lp norms. FOCS’03, 2003.[S14]: N. Stephens-Davidowitz. Discrete Gaussian sampling reduces to CVP and SVP. In Proc. of SODA, 2016.

Bai, Stehle, Wen (ENS Lyon) Improved Reduction from BDD to USVP ICALP’16, Rome, Italy 19 / 28

The main tool: sparsificationKhot’s Lattice Sparsification

Input: B ∈ Qn×n.Output: a *shifted* *sparsified* sub-lattice of L(B):

Lp,z + w = {x ∈ L(B) | 〈z,B−1(x− w)〉 = 0 mod p},

where p is a prime integer, z ∈ Znp and w = Bu for u← U(Zn

p).

0

I 1st sublattice:p = 5, z = (0, 0).

Bai, Stehle, Wen (ENS Lyon) Improved Reduction from BDD to USVP ICALP’16, Rome, Italy 20 / 28

The main tool: sparsificationKhot’s Lattice Sparsification

Input: B ∈ Qn×n.Output: a *shifted* *sparsified* sub-lattice of L(B):

Lp,z + w = {x ∈ L(B) | 〈z,B−1(x− w)〉 = 0 mod p},

where p is a prime integer, z ∈ Znp and w = Bu for u← U(Zn

p).

0

I 2nd sublattice:p = 5, z = (0, 1).

Bai, Stehle, Wen (ENS Lyon) Improved Reduction from BDD to USVP ICALP’16, Rome, Italy 20 / 28

The main tool: sparsificationKhot’s Lattice Sparsification

Input: B ∈ Qn×n.Output: a *shifted* *sparsified* sub-lattice of L(B):

Lp,z + w = {x ∈ L(B) | 〈z,B−1(x− w)〉 = 0 mod p},

where p is a prime integer, z ∈ Znp and w = Bu for u← U(Zn

p).

0

I 3rd sublattice:p = 5, z = (1, 0).

Bai, Stehle, Wen (ENS Lyon) Improved Reduction from BDD to USVP ICALP’16, Rome, Italy 20 / 28

The main tool: sparsificationKhot’s Lattice Sparsification

Input: B ∈ Qn×n.Output: a *shifted* *sparsified* sub-lattice of L(B):

Lp,z + w = {x ∈ L(B) | 〈z,B−1(x− w)〉 = 0 mod p},

where p is a prime integer, z ∈ Znp and w = Bu for u← U(Zn

p).

0

I 4th sublattice:p = 5, z = (1, 1).

Bai, Stehle, Wen (ENS Lyon) Improved Reduction from BDD to USVP ICALP’16, Rome, Italy 20 / 28

The main tool: sparsificationKhot’s Lattice Sparsification

Input: B ∈ Qn×n.Output: a *shifted* *sparsified* sub-lattice of L(B):

Lp,z + w = {x ∈ L(B) | 〈z,B−1(x− w)〉 = 0 mod p},

where p is a prime integer, z ∈ Znp and w = Bu for u← U(Zn

p).

0

I 5th sublattice:p = 5, z = (4, 1).

Bai, Stehle, Wen (ENS Lyon) Improved Reduction from BDD to USVP ICALP’16, Rome, Italy 20 / 28

The main tool: sparsificationKhot’s Lattice Sparsification

Input: B ∈ Qn×n.Output: a *shifted* *sparsified* sub-lattice of L(B):

Lp,z + w = {x ∈ L(B) | 〈z,B−1(x− w)〉 = 0 mod p},

where p is a prime integer, z ∈ Znp and w = Bu for u← U(Zn

p).

0

I 6th sublattice:p = 5, z = (1, 2).

Bai, Stehle, Wen (ENS Lyon) Improved Reduction from BDD to USVP ICALP’16, Rome, Italy 20 / 28

The main tool: sparsificationKhot’s Lattice Sparsification

Input: B ∈ Qn×n.Output: a *shifted* *sparsified* sub-lattice of L(B):

Lp,z + w = {x ∈ L(B) | 〈z,B−1(x− w)〉 = 0 mod p},

where p is a prime integer, z ∈ Znp and w = Bu for u← U(Zn

p).

0

I 7th sublattice:p = 5, z = (1, 3).

Bai, Stehle, Wen (ENS Lyon) Improved Reduction from BDD to USVP ICALP’16, Rome, Italy 20 / 28

The main tool: sparsificationKhot’s Lattice Sparsification

Input: B ∈ Qn×n.Output: a *shifted* *sparsified* sub-lattice of L(B):

Lp,z + w = {x ∈ L(B) | 〈z,B−1(x− w)〉 = 0 mod p},

where p is a prime integer, z ∈ Znp and w = Bu for u← U(Zn

p).

0

I 7th sublattice:p = 5, z = (1, 3).

I 1th shift: w = (0, 0).

Bai, Stehle, Wen (ENS Lyon) Improved Reduction from BDD to USVP ICALP’16, Rome, Italy 20 / 28

The main tool: sparsificationKhot’s Lattice Sparsification

Input: B ∈ Qn×n.Output: a *shifted* *sparsified* sub-lattice of L(B):

Lp,z + w = {x ∈ L(B) | 〈z,B−1(x− w)〉 = 0 mod p},

where p is a prime integer, z ∈ Znp and w = Bu for u← U(Zn

p).

0

I 7th sublattice:p = 5, z = (1, 3).

I 2nd shift: w = (1, 0).

Bai, Stehle, Wen (ENS Lyon) Improved Reduction from BDD to USVP ICALP’16, Rome, Italy 20 / 28

The main tool: sparsificationKhot’s Lattice Sparsification

Input: B ∈ Qn×n.Output: a *shifted* *sparsified* sub-lattice of L(B):

Lp,z + w = {x ∈ L(B) | 〈z,B−1(x− w)〉 = 0 mod p},

where p is a prime integer, z ∈ Znp and w = Bu for u← U(Zn

p).

0

I 7th sublattice:p = 5, z = (1, 3).

I 3rd shift: w = (1, 1).

Bai, Stehle, Wen (ENS Lyon) Improved Reduction from BDD to USVP ICALP’16, Rome, Italy 20 / 28

The main tool: sparsificationKhot’s Lattice Sparsification

Input: B ∈ Qn×n.Output: a *shifted* *sparsified* sub-lattice of L(B):

Lp,z + w = {x ∈ L(B) | 〈z,B−1(x− w)〉 = 0 mod p},

where p is a prime integer, z ∈ Znp and w = Bu for u← U(Zn

p).

0

I 7th sublattice:p = 5, z = (1, 3).

I 4th shift: w = (2, 1).

Bai, Stehle, Wen (ENS Lyon) Improved Reduction from BDD to USVP ICALP’16, Rome, Italy 20 / 28

The main tool: sparsificationKhot’s Lattice Sparsification

Input: B ∈ Qn×n.Output: a *shifted* *sparsified* sub-lattice of L(B):

Lp,z + w = {x ∈ L(B) | 〈z,B−1(x− w)〉 = 0 mod p},

where p is a prime integer, z ∈ Znp and w = Bu for u← U(Zn

p).

0

I 7th sublattice:p = 5, z = (1, 3).

I 5th shift: w = (2, 2).

Bai, Stehle, Wen (ENS Lyon) Improved Reduction from BDD to USVP ICALP’16, Rome, Italy 20 / 28

The main tool: sparsificationKhot’s Lattice Sparsification

Input: B ∈ Qn×n.Output: a *shifted* *sparsified* sub-lattice of L(B):

Lp,z + w = {x ∈ L(B) | 〈z,B−1(x− w)〉 = 0 mod p},

where p is a prime integer, z ∈ Znp and w = Bu for u← U(Zn

p).

0

I 7th sublattice:p = 5, z = (1, 3).

I 6th shift: w = (3, 2).

Bai, Stehle, Wen (ENS Lyon) Improved Reduction from BDD to USVP ICALP’16, Rome, Italy 20 / 28

The main tool: sparsificationKhot’s Lattice Sparsification

Input: B ∈ Qn×n.Output: a *shifted* *sparsified* sub-lattice of L(B):

Lp,z + w = {x ∈ L(B) | 〈z,B−1(x− w)〉 = 0 mod p},

where p is a prime integer, z ∈ Znp and w = Bu for u← U(Zn

p).

0

I 7th sublattice:p = 5, z = (1, 3).

I 7th shift: w = (3, 3).

Bai, Stehle, Wen (ENS Lyon) Improved Reduction from BDD to USVP ICALP’16, Rome, Italy 20 / 28

The main tool: sparsificationKhot’s Lattice Sparsification

Input: B ∈ Qn×n.Output: a *shifted* *sparsified* sub-lattice of L(B):

Lp,z + w = {x ∈ L(B) | 〈z,B−1(x− w)〉 = 0 mod p},

where p is a prime integer, z ∈ Znp and w = Bu for u← U(Zn

p).

0

I 7th sublattice:p = 5, z = (1, 3).

I 8th shift: w = (4, 3).

Bai, Stehle, Wen (ENS Lyon) Improved Reduction from BDD to USVP ICALP’16, Rome, Italy 20 / 28

The main tool: sparsificationKhot’s Lattice Sparsification

Input: B ∈ Qn×n.Output: a *shifted* *sparsified* sub-lattice of L(B):

Lp,z + w = {x ∈ L(B) | 〈z,B−1(x− w)〉 = 0 mod p},

where p is a prime integer, z ∈ Znp and w = Bu for u← U(Zn

p).

0

I 7th sublattice:p = 5, z = (1, 3).

I 9th shift: w = (4, 4).

Bai, Stehle, Wen (ENS Lyon) Improved Reduction from BDD to USVP ICALP’16, Rome, Italy 20 / 28

The main tool: sparsificationKhot’s Lattice Sparsification

Input: B ∈ Qn×n.Output: a *shifted* *sparsified* sub-lattice of L(B):

Lp,z + w = {x ∈ L(B) | 〈z,B−1(x− w)〉 = 0 mod p},

where p is a prime integer, z ∈ Znp and w = Bu for u← U(Zn

p).

0

I 7th sublattice:p = 5, z = (1, 3).

I 10th shift: w = (5, 4).

Bai, Stehle, Wen (ENS Lyon) Improved Reduction from BDD to USVP ICALP’16, Rome, Italy 20 / 28

Main result of the sparsification

A probabilistic argument on Khot’s sparsification [S14]

Given a basis B, vectors v1, · · · , vN , x ∈ L(B), and B−1x /∈ {B−1vi}i≤N ,for any prime p, we have

Prz←↩U(Zn

q)

[x ∈ Lp,z + w

∀i, vi 6∈ Lp,z + w

]≥ 1

p− N

p2 −N

pn−1 ,

where w = Bu for u←↩ U(Znp).

1p− N

p2

is the (approximate) probability toI keep 1 point;

I remove N points.[S14]: N. Stephens-Davidowitz. Discrete Gaussian sampling reduces to CVP and SVP. In Proc. of SODA, 2016.

Bai, Stehle, Wen (ENS Lyon) Improved Reduction from BDD to USVP ICALP’16, Rome, Italy 21 / 28

New reduction for γ = 1

I BDD1/√

2 instance: (L(B), t).

λ1

√2

cp1(0)

p2 p3

t

Bai, Stehle, Wen (ENS Lyon) Improved Reduction from BDD to USVP ICALP’16, Rome, Italy 22 / 28

New reduction for γ = 1

I Remove annoying points around the target t.

λ1

√2

remove keep

cp1(0)

p2 p3

t

Bai, Stehle, Wen (ENS Lyon) Improved Reduction from BDD to USVP ICALP’16, Rome, Italy 22 / 28

How sparse?

Recall the probability to keep 1 point and remove N points:

1p− N

p2 .

I We want it to be at least 1poly(n) ;

I thus, p ≥ N and both should be ≤ poly(n).

We can sparsify the lattice by removing polynomially many points.

Bai, Stehle, Wen (ENS Lyon) Improved Reduction from BDD to USVP ICALP’16, Rome, Italy 23 / 28

How sparse?

Recall the probability to keep 1 point and remove N points:

1p− N

p2 .

I We want it to be at least 1poly(n) ;

I thus, p ≥ N and both should be ≤ poly(n).

We can sparsify the lattice by removing polynomially many points.

Bai, Stehle, Wen (ENS Lyon) Improved Reduction from BDD to USVP ICALP’16, Rome, Italy 23 / 28

How sparse?

Recall the probability to keep 1 point and remove N points:

1p− N

p2 .

I We want it to be at least 1poly(n) ;

I thus, p ≥ N and both should be ≤ poly(n).

We can sparsify the lattice by removing polynomially many points.

What is the worst-case list decoding radius?

Bai, Stehle, Wen (ENS Lyon) Improved Reduction from BDD to USVP ICALP’16, Rome, Italy 24 / 28

Approaching the limit

Within λ1/√

2, adapted from [MG02, Th. 5.2]

For any n-dimensional lattice L and any vector t ∈ Span(L), we have#L ∩ B(t, λ1(L)/

√2) ≤ 2n.

cp1

p2 p3

tλ1(L)

√ 2

λ1(L)

λ1(L

)

Equator

North Pole

South Pole

[MG02]: D. Micciancio and S. Goldwasser. Complexity of lattice problem: A cryptography perspective. Kluwer, 2009.

Bai, Stehle, Wen (ENS Lyon) Improved Reduction from BDD to USVP ICALP’16, Rome, Italy 25 / 28

λ1/√

2 is the limit

Within λ1/√

2, adapted from [MG02, Th. 5.2]

For any n-dimensional lattice L and any vector t ∈ Span(L), we have#L ∩ B(t, λ1(L)/

√2) ≤ 2n.

cp1

p2 p3

tλ1(L)

√ 2

λ1(L)

λ1(L

)

Equator

North Pole

South Pole

Extremely dense lattice, adapted from [MG02, Lem. 4.1]

For any α > 1/√

2, there exists ε > 0 such that for any sufficiently large n we canfind an n-dimensional lattice L and a vector t ∈ Span(L), such that#L ∩ B(t, α · λ1(L)) ≥ 2nε

.

[MG02]: D. Micciancio and S. Goldwasser. Complexity of lattice problem: A cryptography perspective. Kluwer, 2009.

Bai, Stehle, Wen (ENS Lyon) Improved Reduction from BDD to USVP ICALP’16, Rome, Italy 25 / 28

Our result

BDD 1√2γ

γ = 1USVP>γ

This reduction algorithm also works for any γ with γ ≤ poly(n).

This algorithm actually works for any γ ≥ 1,thanks Stephens-Davidowitz for the observation.

Bai, Stehle, Wen (ENS Lyon) Improved Reduction from BDD to USVP ICALP’16, Rome, Italy 26 / 28

Open problems

I The sparsification in our reduction heavily relies on randomness.

• Problem 1. Remove the sparsification randomness.

I In practice, randomly chosen lattice is sparse enough such that thereis almost no point within λ1/

√2-radius.

• Problem 2. Is sparsification just an artifact?

Bai, Stehle, Wen (ENS Lyon) Improved Reduction from BDD to USVP ICALP’16, Rome, Italy 27 / 28

Open problems

I Conjecture: BDD and USVP are computationally identical.

BDD 1c·γ

= USVPγ

c ∈ [1,√

2]

• Problem 3. What is the constant c? Is c =√

2?

Bai, Stehle, Wen (ENS Lyon) Improved Reduction from BDD to USVP ICALP’16, Rome, Italy 28 / 28