CyberIntel ⬡ News
★ Saved ◆ Cyber Reads
← Back ◬ AI & Machine Learning Aug 10, 2026

Canonicalization Failures as a Recurring Vulnerability Class: Representation Divergence in Cryptographic Systems and Its Avoidance

arXiv Security Archived 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?)
    💬 Team Notes
    Article Info
    Source
    arXiv Security
    Category
    ◬ AI & Machine Learning
    Published
    Aug 10, 2026
    Archived
    Aug 10, 2026
    Full Text
    ✓ Saved locally
    Open Original ↗