Demo Data from SIGIR 2026 / reviewers in the wild / expert
Mang Zhao
dblp:270/6872
· DBLP profile ↗
7ranked-venue papers
1as first author
7since 2021 · last 2026
0009-0002-4720-6551ORCID · corroborated
Domains — the database's venue-derived domains; a paper can count in several
Security and privacy · 7 · 1 first-author · 7 since 2021
Expertise — from the expertise taxonomy: the topics of the expert's papers under the CCF categories. A weight counts papers with recency: 1 for a paper about the topic, 0.3 when the topic is its context, halved every five years.
| Network and information security
6 papers |
Cryptographic protocols and secure computation · 49% Cryptographic primitives and cryptanalysis · 28% Authentication and access control · 23% |
Topics — the 19 heaviest of 22, each with the papers that count most for it
| Topic | Weight | Papers | Last | Evidence papers |
|---|---|---|---|---|
Cryptographic protocols and secure computation › secure messaging › secure group messaging
messaging layer security |
1.0 | 1 | 2026 | ETK: External-Operations TreeKEM and the Security of MLS in RFC 9420 · EUROCRYPT (2) 2026 |
Cryptographic protocols and secure computation › secure messaging
secure group messaging |
1.0 | 1 | 2026 | ETK: External-Operations TreeKEM and the Security of MLS in RFC 9420 · EUROCRYPT (2) 2026 |
Cryptographic protocols and secure computation › key exchange › group key agreement › continuous group key agreement
TreeKEM |
1.0 | 1 | 2026 | ETK: External-Operations TreeKEM and the Security of MLS in RFC 9420 · EUROCRYPT (2) 2026 |
Authentication and access control › authentication › authentication protocols
deniable authentication |
0.8 | 1 | 2024 | Secure Messaging with Strong Compromise Resilience, Temporal Privacy, and Immediate Decryption · SP 2024 |
Cryptographic protocols and secure computation › key management › key distribution
group key distribution |
0.8 | 1 | 2024 | Multi-Stage Group Key Distribution and PAKEs: Securing Zoom Groups against Malicious Servers without New Security Elements · SP 2024 |
Cryptographic protocols and secure computation › key exchange › authenticated key exchange
password-authenticated key exchange |
0.8 | 1 | 2024 | Multi-Stage Group Key Distribution and PAKEs: Securing Zoom Groups against Malicious Servers without New Security Elements · SP 2024 |
Cryptographic protocols and secure computation
secure messaging |
0.8 | 1 | 2024 | Secure Messaging with Strong Compromise Resilience, Temporal Privacy, and Immediate Decryption · SP 2024 |
Authentication and access control › authentication
authentication protocols |
0.7 | 1 | 2023 | FIDO2, CTAP 2.1, and WebAuthn 2: Provable Security and Post-Quantum Instantiation · SP 2023 |
Authentication and access control › passwordless authentication
FIDO2 |
0.7 | 1 | 2023 | FIDO2, CTAP 2.1, and WebAuthn 2: Provable Security and Post-Quantum Instantiation · SP 2023 |
Authentication and access control
passwordless authentication |
0.7 | 1 | 2023 | FIDO2, CTAP 2.1, and WebAuthn 2: Provable Security and Post-Quantum Instantiation · SP 2023 |
Cryptographic primitives and cryptanalysis
post-quantum security |
0.7 | 1 | 2023 | FIDO2, CTAP 2.1, and WebAuthn 2: Provable Security and Post-Quantum Instantiation · SP 2023 |
Cryptographic protocols and secure computation
protocol verification |
0.7 | 1 | 2023 | Automated Analysis of Protocols that use Authenticated Encryption: How Subtle AEAD Differences can impact Protocol Security · USENIX Security Symposium 2023 |
Cryptographic primitives and cryptanalysis › public-key cryptography
digital signatures |
0.5 | 1 | 2021 | The Provable Security of Ed25519: Theory and Practice · SP 2021 |
Cryptographic primitives and cryptanalysis › public-key cryptography › digital signatures › discrete logarithm signature
EdDSA |
0.5 | 1 | 2021 | The Provable Security of Ed25519: Theory and Practice · SP 2021 |
Cryptographic primitives and cryptanalysis › public-key cryptography › digital signatures › unforgeability
existential unforgeability |
0.5 | 1 | 2021 | The Provable Security of Ed25519: Theory and Practice · SP 2021 |
Cryptographic primitives and cryptanalysis › provable security
protocol security proof |
0.5 | 1 | 2021 | The Provable Security of Ed25519: Theory and Practice · SP 2021 |
Cryptographic primitives and cryptanalysis
provable security |
0.5 | 1 | 2021 | The Provable Security of Ed25519: Theory and Practice · SP 2021 |
Cryptographic primitives and cryptanalysis
post-quantum cryptography |
0.2 | 1 | 2024 | Secure Messaging with Strong Compromise Resilience, Temporal Privacy, and Immediate Decryption · SP 2024 |
Cryptographic primitives and cryptanalysis
authenticated encryption |
0.2 | 1 | 2023 | Automated Analysis of Protocols that use Authenticated Encryption: How Subtle AEAD Differences can impact Protocol Security · USENIX Security Symposium 2023 |
Methods — techniques the papers use, named apart from their topics
provable security · 1.4multi-stage group key distribution · 0.8game-based security definition · 0.8PAKE · 0.8formal security analysis · 0.7formal analysis · 0.7security proof · 0.5fiat-shamir paradigm · 0.5
| Year | Publication | Venue | Position |
|---|---|---|---|
| 2026 | On the State-Compromise Security of End-to-End Real-Time Group Communication
Mang Zhao, Qian Wang 0002 |
CRYPTO (10) | 1 |
| 2026 | ETK: External-Operations TreeKEM and the Security of MLS in RFC 9420
Cas Cremers, Esra Günsay, Vera Wesselkamp, Mang Zhao |
EUROCRYPT (2) | 4 |
| 2024 | Multi-Stage Group Key Distribution and PAKEs: Securing Zoom Groups against Malicious Servers without New Security ElementsabstractVideo conferencing apps like Zoom have hundreds of millions of daily users, making them a high-value target for surveillance and subversion. While such apps claim to achieve some forms of end-to-end encryption, they usually assume an incorruptible server that is able to identify and authenticate all the parties in a meeting. Concretely this means that, e.g., even when using the "end-to-end encrypted" setting, malicious Zoom servers could eavesdrop or impersonate in arbitrary groups.In this work, we show how security against malicious servers can be improved by changing the way in which such protocols use passwords (known as passcodes in Zoom) and integrating a password-authenticated key exchange (PAKE) protocol.To formally prove that our approach achieves its goals, we formalize a class of cryptographic protocols suitable for this setting, and define a basic security notion for them, in which group security can be achieved assuming the server is trusted to correctly authorize the group members. We prove that Zoom indeed meets this notion. We then propose a stronger security notion that can provide security against malicious servers, and propose a transformation that can achieve this notion. We show how we can apply our transformation to Zoom to provably achieve stronger security against malicious servers, notably without introducing new security elements. Cas Cremers, Eyal Ronen, Mang Zhao |
SP | 3 |
| 2024 | Secure Messaging with Strong Compromise Resilience, Temporal Privacy, and Immediate DecryptionabstractRecent years have seen many advances in designing secure messaging protocols, aiming at provably strong security properties in theory or high efficiency for real-world practical deployment. However, important trade-off areas of the design space inbetween these elements have not yet been explored.In this work we design the first provably secure protocol that at the same time achieves (i) strong resilience against fine-grained compromise, (ii) temporal privacy, and (iii) immediate decryption with constant-size overhead, notably, in the post-quantum (PQ) setting. Besides these main design goals, we introduce a novel definition of offline deniability suitable for our setting, and prove that our protocol meets it, notably when combined with a PQ offline deniable initial key exchange. Cas Cremers, Mang Zhao |
SP | 2 |
| 2023 | FIDO2, CTAP 2.1, and WebAuthn 2: Provable Security and Post-Quantum InstantiationabstractThe FIDO2 protocol is a globally used standard for passwordless authentication, building on an alliance between major players in the online authentication space. While already widely deployed, the standard is still under active development. Since version 2.1 of its CTAP sub-protocol, FIDO2 can potentially be instantiated with post-quantum secure primitives.We provide the first formal security analysis of FIDO2 with the CTAP 2.1 and WebAuthn 2 sub-protocols. Our security models build on work by Barbosa et al. for their analysis of FIDO2 with CTAP 2.0 and WebAuthn 1, which we extend in several ways. First, we provide a more fine-grained security model that allows us to prove more relevant protocol properties, such as guarantees about token binding agreement, the None attestation mode, and user verification. Second, we can prove post-quantum security for FIDO2 under certain conditions and minor protocol extensions. Finally, we show that for some threat models, the downgrade resilience of FIDO2 can be improved, and show how to achieve this with a simple modification. Nina Bindel, Cas Cremers, Mang Zhao |
SP | 3 |
| 2023 | Automated Analysis of Protocols that use Authenticated Encryption: How Subtle AEAD Differences can impact Protocol Security
Cas Cremers, Alexander Dax, Charlie Jacomme, Mang Zhao |
USENIX Security Symposium | 4 |
| 2021 | The Provable Security of Ed25519: Theory and PracticeabstractA standard requirement for a signature scheme is that it is existentially unforgeable under chosen message attacks (EUF-CMA), alongside other properties of interest such as strong unforgeability (SUF-CMA), and resilience against key substitution attacks.Remarkably, no detailed proofs have ever been given for these security properties for EdDSA, and in particular its Ed25519 instantiations. Ed25519 is one of the most efficient and widely used signature schemes, and different instantiations of Ed25519 are used in protocols such as TLS 1.3, SSH, Tor, ZCash, and WhatsApp/Signal. The differences between these instantiations are subtle, and only supported by informal arguments, with many works assuming results can be directly transferred from Schnorr signatures. Similarly, several proofs of protocol security simply assume that Ed25519 satisfies properties such as EUF-CMA or SUF-CMA.In this work we provide the first detailed analysis and security proofs of Ed25519 signature schemes. While the design of the schemes follows the well-established Fiat-Shamir paradigm, which should guarantee existential unforgeability, there are many side cases and encoding details that complicate the proofs, and all other security properties needed to be proven independently.Our work provides scientific rationale for choosing among several Ed25519 variants and understanding their properties, fills a much needed proof gap in modern protocol proofs that use these signatures, and supports further standardisation efforts. Jacqueline Brendel, Cas Cremers, Dennis Jackson, Mang Zhao |
SP | 4 |