CACrown ArchivesThe cinema collection
EN/FR
Search
Menu
Research dossier · General Reference

RCCA security

security notion in cryptography

Cross-disciplinary reference desk with index cards, atlas, dictionary and catalogue
General referenceInterpretive dossier study · Crown Archives visual atlas
Record originEnglish Wikipedia
Text licenseCC BY-SA 4.0
Source revisionAug 26, 2026
Entity authorityQ18392897 ↗
Source-derived summary

Replayable CCA security (RCCA security) is a security notion in cryptography that relaxes the older notion of security against a chosen-ciphertext attack (CCA, more precisely adaptive security notion CCA2). All CCA-secure systems are RCCA secure but the converse is not true. The claim is that for many use cases, CCA is too strong, and RCCA suffices. A certain number of cryptographic schemes have now been proved to be RCCA-secure, instead of CCA secure.

The term was introduced in 2003 in a research publication by Ran Canetti, Hugo Krawczyk and Jesper B. Nielsen.

Editorial summary

Begin with the source’s own compact description: “RCCA security” is security notion in cryptography. The dossier treats that line as a proposition to test through RCCA, security and notion, not as a finished interpretation.

Editorial reviewA concise reference frame for defining the subject, testing terminology and identifying the institution closest to the evidence. The current lead gives the account dated anchors—2003—that can be checked directly. The selected authority fields contribute no independent date. For this dossier, RCCA, security and notion is the immediate research focus.
Editorial analysis

Why this record matters

The phrase “security notion in cryptography” supplies a clear boundary for inquiry. It also exposes the unanswered questions: who defined that boundary, when it became stable and which sources sit outside it.

Evidence profile

Named sources, stable identifiers and responsible institutions provide the strongest route from overview to verifiable evidence. The source revision retrieved here is dated Aug 26, 2026. The linked authority identifier is Q18392897. None of the 0 selected statements returned an explicit reference. The first chronological checks are 2003.

Critical limits

Overview language is designed for orientation and should not be treated as a substitute for the evidence cited beneath it. The lead is largely declarative, so disagreement and counter-evidence require a deliberate search beyond the opening account. Authority statements aid reconciliation but still require their own references, qualifiers and ranks to be checked.

How to read it

Use the entry as an orientation point, then follow its citations and revision history. Names, dates and institutional relationships should be checked against the original record.

Best used for
  • Subject orientation
  • Search vocabulary
  • Locating named sources
Verify next

The closest primary source, responsible institution and strongest cited specialist reference.

Three-step research path

  1. Establish the record: confirm the title “RCCA security”, its source revision and the description used here.
  2. Expand the search: follow RCCA security primary sources, RCCA security archive and RCCA research across catalogues and specialist indexes.
  3. Test the account: compare the strongest cited source with the responsible institution’s current record and note any disagreement.

Questions for further research

  1. Which source most directly establishes the central claim about “RCCA security”?
  2. Which institution is responsible for the underlying evidence?
  3. Which cited source is closest to the event, object or claim?
Subject index

Search terms from this dossier

Source & attribution

This entry incorporates text from “RCCA security” on English Wikipedia. Contributors are listed in the page history. Text is available under the Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike 4.0 License. Selected authority identifiers and statements are retrieved from Wikidata under CC0; their references and qualifiers remain part of the verification path.