igneum-network/igneum
1
0
Fork 0
Code Issues Pull requests Releases Activity

attack-pass F1: PASS under the re-worded gate (1); AP-F1-1 shadow redundancy bound routed to the v5 list (coordinator ruling)

Browse source 
Co-Authored-By: Claude Fable 5.1 <noreply@anthropic.com>
This commit is contained in:
igneum-labs 2026-10-07 10:15:58 +00:00
parent 61f97bec2f
commit b59bd7045a
1 changed files with 8 additions and 2 deletions
Show stats Download patch file Download diff file Expand all files Collapse all files

10
docs/analysis/attack-pass-2026-10.md
View file

@ -21,7 +21,7 @@ against the log before quoting it to the project lead.
| # | Attack | Gate (same as 1.4) | Result so far | Status |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| F1 | Shadow block compressibility and shortcut search | best compressed block within 5% of N on every program; no program over 10% compressible | 10^4 and 10^5 class v4 programs: saved instructions mean 0.62%, max 4.69% at 10^4 and 5.078% at 10^5 (1 of 100,000 over 5%, 0 over 10%); nothing folds or dedupes across the 27 passes; every saving is local peephole algebra that clang -O3 removes from the honest kernel too (IR counts match on the worst programs); 0 mismatches in 2 x 10^5 differential and verifier checks, z3 window proofs 0 counterexamples. AP-F1-1: the 0.078-point letter miss on one program, ruling asked. Record `docs/analysis/attack-pass/f1-shadow.md` | PASS on substance; AP-F1-1 letter miss, ruling asked |
| F1 | Shadow block compressibility and shortcut search | no compression of the shadow block beyond the honest compiler's simplification, measured against that compiler on the same program; the 27 repetitions never fewer than 27x (coordinator's ruling 7 Oct 2026, 12:3x UK; the plan's gate (1) and row F1 carry the same) | 10^4 and 10^5 class v4 programs: saved instructions mean 0.62%, max 5.078% at 10^5 (1 of 100,000 over 5%, 0 over 10%); nothing folds or dedupes across the 27 passes; every saving is local peephole algebra that clang -O3 removes from the honest kernel too (IR counts match on the worst programs), so against the compiler the compression is 0; 0 mismatches in 2 x 10^5 differential and verifier checks, z3 window proofs 0 counterexamples. AP-F1-1 routed to the v5 list as a shadow redundancy bound. Record `docs/analysis/attack-pass/f1-shadow.md` | PASS; AP-F1-1 on the v5 list |
| F2 | Mixer round margin (SAT/MILP, 1 to 4 keyed applications) | no distinguisher or shortcut beyond 2 of the 8 applications | one application characterised (differential weight 10 to 12, linear 1, verified on the real code on three days); two applications: no trail at or below weight 20 to 24 within 7,200 s per job, the MSB and LSB families die at two; rotational-XOR no bias at one application; the multiply layer folds on 0 of 2^20 inputs, k applications cost k; k = 3, 4 general jobs closing on the box. Record `docs/analysis/attack-pass/f2-mixer.md` | PASS (effort-bounded; k = 3, 4 lines pending) |
| F3 | Chained cache j+1 bound and storage-vs-recompute curve | no derivation under j+1 blocks; curve monotone; f=1 point unchanged | 0 of 64 and 0 of 1,024 lines under j+1 (exhaustive closure search, cross-checked by exhaustive pebbling at 10 lines, 10,240 pairs, 0 mismatches); both planted broken chains fire; curve monotone at both op counts; f=1 point 9,360 ops per item unchanged. Record `docs/analysis/attack-pass/f3-cache.md` | PASS |
| F4 | Weak-day census over 2^24 day keys | fraction of days with gain over 1.1x under 2^-20 | PASS against M2 (DSP-bound datapath): 0 of 2^28 days over 1.1x; planted weak days fire; every ROT and RC class 0. Bound finding AP-F4-1 on M1 (LUT adders): 5,476 of 2^24 days (3.26e-4) over 1.1x as the tail of a sum, no weak class; worst public-calendar day 29,337 at 1.121x, at most 12.1% more rate that day for a per-day LUT FPGA, 0 for any chip; redraw rule (NAF sum under 163 rejected) routed to the next class. Record `docs/analysis/attack-pass/f4-weakday.md` | PASS (v4); AP-F4-1 routed to the next class |
@ -267,7 +267,13 @@ relative to a card: no shortcut. The gate as written counts honest-compiler simp
ways to close: re-word gate (1) and row F1 to "compressible beyond the honest compiler's own simplification" (the
firms then attack chip-relative compression, which is the question), or a shadow-draw redundancy bound in the next
class (reject a shadow with over 12 peephole-removable instructions per pass, rejection about 1e-5; class v4 is on
the live vote). Status: FINDING-OPEN by the letter, PASS on substance; the coordinator rules.
the live vote). Ruling (coordinator, 7 October 2026, 12:3x UK): both. Gate (1) and row F1 re-worded to "no
compression of the shadow block beyond the honest compiler's simplification, measured against that compiler on the
same program" (sent to the cryptanalysis lane for the plan and the firms' brief), under which the 5.078 percent
letter miss at honest-compiler parity is a PASS; and a shadow redundancy bound on the v5 generator's list beside
AP-F4-1 and AP-F8-1 (the generator refuses a shadow block whose honest-compiler simplification exceeds a stated
fraction; the v5 lane sets the fraction from F1's census), gated by F1's harness on 64 seeds of the v5 stream.
Status: F1 PASS; AP-F1-1 FIXED-AND-PASSED against v5 once the bound is in the v5 generator and F1's census passes.
AP-F5-1 (algorithm and hash lane, ours; the ladder lane is closed). The k about 0.33 chip-efficiency figure is