Advances in Cryptology — ASIACRYPT 2001

7th International Conference on the Theory and Application of Cryptology and Information Security Gold Coast, Australia, December 9-13, 2001. Proceedings

By: Colin Boyd

Write A Review

eText | 30 June 2003 | Edition Number 1

At a Glance

Format
PDF

eText

$84.99

or 4 interest-free payments of $21.25 with

Instant online reading in your Booktopia eTextbook Library *

Why choose an eTextbook?

Instant Access *

Purchase and read your book immediately

Read Aloud

Listen and follow along as Bookshelf reads to you

Study Tools

Built-in study tools like highlights and more

* eTextbooks are not downloadable to your eReader or an app and can be accessed via web browsers only. You must be connected to the internet and have no technical issues with your device or browser that could prevent the eTextbook from operating.

The origins of the Asiacrypt series of conferences can be traced back to 1990, when the ?rst Auscrypt conference was held, although the name Asiacrypt was ?rst used for the 1991 conference in Japan. Starting with Asiacrypt 2000, the conference is now one of three annual conferences organized by the Inter- tional Association for Cryptologic Research (IACR). The continuing success of Asiacrypt is in no small part due to the e?orts of the Asiacrypt Steering C- mittee (ASC) and the strong support of the IACR Board of Directors. There were 153 papers submitted to Asiacrypt 2001 and 33 of these were accepted for inclusion in these proceedings. The authors of every paper, whether accepted or not, made a valued contribution to the success of the conference. Sending out rejection noti?cations to so many hard working authors is one of the most unpleasant tasks of the Program Chair. The review process lasted some 10 weeks and consisted of an initial refe- eing phase followed by an extensive discussion period. My heartfelt thanks go to all members of the Program Committee who put in extreme amounts of time to give their expert analysis and opinions on the submissions. All papers were reviewed by at least three committee members; in many cases, particularly for those papers submitted by committee members, additional reviews were obt- ned. Specialist reviews were provided by an army of external reviewers without whom our decisions would have been much more di?cult.