On the Security of ECDSA with Additive Key Derivation and Presignatures
Jens Groth, Victor Shoup
Abstract
Two common variations of ECDSA signatures are additive key derivation and presignatures. Additive key derivation is a simple mechanism for deriving many subkeys from a single master key, and is already widely used in cryptocurrency applications with the Hierarchical Deterministic Wallet mechanism standardized in Bitcoin Improvement Proposal 32 (BIP32). Because of its linear nature, additive key derivation is also amenable to efficient implementation in the threshold setting. With presignatures, the secret and public nonces used in the ECDSA signing algorithm are precomputed. In the threshold setting, using presignatures along with other precomputed data allows for an extremely efficient "online phase" of the protocol. Recent works have advocated for both of these variations, sometimes combined together. However, somewhat surprisingly, we are aware of no prior security proof for additive key derivation, let alone for additive key derivation in combination with presignatures.
In this paper, we provide a thorough analysis of these variations, both in isolation and in combination. Our analysis is in the generic group model (GGM). Importantly, we do not modify ECDSA or weaken the standard notion of security in any way. Of independent interest, we also present a version of the GGM that is specific to elliptic curves. This EC-GGM better models some of the idiosyncrasies (such as the conversion function and malleability) of ECDSA. In addition to this analysis, we report security weaknesses in these variations that apparently have not been previously reported. For example, we show that when both variations are combined, there is a cube-root attack on ECDSA, which is much faster than the best known, square-root attack on plain ECDSA. We also present two mitigations against these weaknesses: re-randomized presignatures and homogeneous key derivation. Each of these mitigations is very lightweight, and when used in combination, the security is essentially the same as that of plain ECDSA (in the EC-GGM).
Ask about this paper
Your agent reads all of it.
Lune indexed this paper to the last equation, along with the top-tier papers that cite it. Ask a question and the answer quotes them.
Cited by top-tier papers7
- Low-Bandwidth Threshold ECDSA via Pseudorandom Correlation GeneratorsDamiano Abram, Ariel Nof, Claudio Orlandi, Peter Scholl et al.S&P 2022 · 51 citations
- Decentralized and Stateful Serverless Computing on the Internet Computer BlockchainMaksym Arutyunyan, Andriy Berestovskyy, Adam Bratschi-Kaye, Ulan Degenbaev et al.USENIX ATC 2023 · 10 citations
- Demystifying and Detecting Cryptographic Defects in Ethereum Smart ContractsJiashuo Zhang, Yiming Shen, Jiachi Chen, Jianzhong Su et al.ICSE 2025 · 2 citations
- Accountable authentication with privacy protection: The Larch system for universal loginEmma Dauterman, Danny Lin, Henry Corrigan-Gibbs, David MazièresOSDI 2023 · 2 citations
- Threshold ECDSA in Two RoundsYingjie Lyu, Zengpeng Li, Hong-Sheng Zhou, Xudong DengCCS 2025
Builds on2
Related papers
- Secure Two-party Threshold ECDSA from ECDSA AssumptionsJack Doerner, Yashvanth Kondi, Eysa Lee, Abhi ShelatS&P 2018 · 171 citations
- Robust Threshold ECDSA with Online-Friendly Design in Three RoundsGuofeng Tang, Haiyang XueS&P 2025
- Efficient Online-friendly Two-Party ECDSA SignatureHaiyang Xue, Man Ho Au, Xiang Xie, Tsz Hon Yuen et al.CCS 2021 · 31 citations
- Fast Secure Multiparty ECDSA with Practical Distributed Key Generation and Applications to Cryptocurrency CustodyYehuda Lindell, Ariel NofCCS 2018 · 220 citations
- UC Non-Interactive, Proactive, Threshold ECDSA with Identifiable AbortsRan Canetti, Rosario Gennaro, Steven Goldfeder, Nikolaos Makriyannis et al.CCS 2020 · 135 citations
