Canonicalization Failures as a Recurring Vulnerability Class: Representation Divergence in Cryptographic Systems and Its Avoidance
arXiv SecurityArchived Aug 10, 2026✓ Full text saved
arXiv:2608.06508v1 Announce Type: new Abstract: Cryptographic systems operate on bytes but mean semantic objects. The translation between the two is rarely unique. Where this uniqueness is not enforced, an attack surface opens up as soon as a hash, a signature, replay protection, or consensus identity depends on the representation. The same class of failure has been discovered independently and named locally across many ecosystems, as transaction malleability, non-deterministic value encoding, m
Full text archived locally
✦ AI Summary· Claude Sonnet
Computer Science > Cryptography and Security
[Submitted on 6 Aug 2026]
Canonicalization Failures as a Recurring Vulnerability Class: Representation Divergence in Cryptographic Systems and Its Avoidance
Arslan Brömme
Cryptographic systems operate on bytes but mean semantic objects. The translation between the two is rarely unique. Where this uniqueness is not enforced, an attack surface opens up as soon as a hash, a signature, replay protection, or consensus identity depends on the representation. The same class of failure has been discovered independently and named locally across many ecosystems, as transaction malleability, non-deterministic value encoding, message malleability, or hash chain malleability, without its common root being tracked as a cross-ecosystem grid. This work organizes the scattered findings systematically: it shows that they are instances of one violated uniqueness condition, along two basic directions: multiple valid codes for one object (object-side multiple representation) or one code for multiple objects (code-side semantic collapse). The contribution is explicitly not the discovery of the phenomenon, but is threefold: the systematization by representation mechanism rather than by affected system, the bridge between classical canonicalization security and a representation- and computability-theoretic foundation, and the translation into an applicable review procedure (a canonicalization obligation with a sequence of review steps, a field-type classification, and an operational boundary model) with which the risk can be recognized preventively. We substantiate the class with worked-out cases, delimit it against incidents that are not representation problems, and deliberately keep the claims to what is demonstrable: enforced uniqueness can reduce the exploitability of a failure class, but it neither replaces further protective measures or makes any statement about cryptographic security in the narrower sense
Comments: 33 pages, 1 figure, 4 tables
Subjects: Cryptography and Security (cs.CR)
Cite as: arXiv:2608.06508 [cs.CR]
(or arXiv:2608.06508v1 [cs.CR] for this version)
https://doi.org/10.48550/arXiv.2608.06508
Focus to learn more
Submission history
From: Arslan Brömme [view email]
[v1] Thu, 6 Aug 2026 18:47:32 UTC (62 KB)
Access Paper:
HTML (experimental)
view license
Current browse context:
cs.CR
< prev | next >
new | recent | 2026-08
Change to browse by:
cs
References & Citations
NASA ADS
Google Scholar
Semantic Scholar
Export BibTeX Citation
Bookmark
Bibliographic Tools
Bibliographic and Citation Tools
Bibliographic Explorer Toggle
Bibliographic Explorer (What is the Explorer?)
Connected Papers Toggle
Connected Papers (What is Connected Papers?)
Litmaps Toggle
Litmaps (What is Litmaps?)
scite.ai Toggle
scite Smart Citations (What are Smart Citations?)
Code, Data, Media
Demos
Related Papers
About arXivLabs
Which authors of this paper are endorsers? | Disable MathJax (What is MathJax?)