Elliptic Curve Discrete Log in a Composite Ring Elliptic curves are usually defined over prime rings (fields), but what if we chose a ring of composite order? Let $n = pq$ for $p,q$ large primes. Say I have elliptic curve $y^2 = x^3 + ax + b$ over the Ring of integers mod $n$. And I have two points on the curve, say $A, B$ such that $A = xB$. From this alone, it should be enough to determine $x$ correct? I have $n$, I have the factorization of $n = pq$, and I have $A,B$. Everything I read on elliptic curves seems to initialize over our prime field. I can find no discussion of what the actual attack is. I understand the hardness of the problem has been reduced to the integers now mod $p$ and $q$, but I don't understand the process to determine $x$ here.
Well, if you have a pseudocurve [1] based on the formula:

$$y^2 = x^3 + ax + b \pmod{ pq }$$

what you have is really two different curves stapled together; that is, the curves based on:

$$y^2 = x^3 + ax + b \pmod{ p }$$

$$y^2 = x^3 + ax + b \pmod{ q }$$

You can look at a point in the $pq$ curve as really being a point in the $p$ curve and a point in the $q$ curve; and when you perform an operation, the two component curves act independently.

So, if we denote a point $A$ as the pair $(A_p, A_q)$ and the point $B$ as the pair $(B_p, B_q)$, then the result of the point addition $A+B$ is the pair $(A_p + B_p, A_q + B_q)$, where the first addition is an addition in the $p$ curve, and the second addition is in the $q$ curve.  And if exactly one of $A_p+B_p, A_q+B_q$ is the point at infinity, then it turns out that the value $A+B$ is not defined in the $pq$ curve - that's why it's called a pseudocurve, because not all operations within the pseudocurve have defined results - it fails to be a group because it is not closed.

More to the point, if you take a point $P$ in the original $pq$, and compute $kA$, then that is equivalent:


Mapping the point $P$ to a point on the $p$ curve (by taking the $x$ and $y$ coordinates modulo $p$), and then computing $kA_p$
Mapping the point $P$ to a point on the $q$ curve (by taking the $x$ and $y$ coordinates modulo $q$), and then computing $kA_q$
Recombining $kA_p$ and $kA_q$ by reconstructing both the $x$ and $y$ coordinates using the Chinese Remainder Theorem.


With this observation, we have the following method to solve the original $A = xB$ problem:


Factor $n$ into $p, q$
Point count both the $p$ curve and the $q$ curve
Solve $A = xB$ over the $p$ curve (resulting in $x \bmod n_p$, where $n_p$ is the number of points on the $p$ curve)
Solve $A = xB$ over the $q$ curve (resulting in $x \bmod n_q$, where $n_q$ is the number of points on the $q$ curve)
Use the Chinese remainder theorem to combine $x \bmod n_p$ and $x \bmod n_q$ into $x$


These operations are jointly cheaper than solving an ECDLog problem over a prime the same size as $pq$



[1]: I'll explain why it's called pseudocurve below