Rational secret sharing, first introduced by Halpern and Teague, means that whether players send their shares relies on their utilities, whereas in traditional scheme, players are assumed to contribute their shares willingly. This paper puts forward a rational secret-sharing scheme where players run their reconstruction protocol in point-to-point communication networks other than broadcast channels which are often used in previous papers. Kol and Naor propose an efficient t -out-of- n protocol for rational secret sharing without using cryptographic primitives while it has weak robustness to coalition when short player colludes with any long players. The protocol proposed by Fuchsbauer and Katz runs efficiently in asynchronous or point-to-point networks. Although it achieves strict Nash equilibrium and is stable with respect to trembles, it is susceptible to realise fairness among the whole party. This paper proposes a rational secret-sharing scheme in point-to-point communication networks to achieve fairness and robustness to coalition.
Rational secret sharing, first introduced by Halpern and Teague, means that whether players send their shares relies on their utilities, whereas in traditional scheme, players are assumed to contribute their shares willingly. This paper puts forward a rational secret-sharing scheme where players run their reconstruction protocol in point-to-point communication networks other than broadcast channels which are often used in previous papers. Kol and Naor propose an efficient t -out-of- n protocol for rational secret sharing without using cryptographic primitives while it has weak robustness to coalition when short player colludes with any long players. The protocol proposed by Fuchsbauer and Katz runs efficiently in asynchronous or point-to-point networks. Although it achieves strict Nash equilibrium and is stable with respect to trembles, it is susceptible to realise fairness among the whole party. This paper proposes a rational secret-sharing scheme in point-to-point communication networks to achieve fairness and robustness to coalition.
Rational secret sharing, first introduced by Halpern and Teague, means that whether players send their shares relies on their utilities, whereas in traditional scheme, players are assumed to contribute their shares willingly. This paper introduces a new kind of player and puts forward a 2-out-of-2 rational secret sharing scheme where players run their reconstruction protocol in standard communication networks other than broadcast channels which are often used in previous papers. The 2-out-of-2 rational secret sharing scheme in standard communication networks can achieve fairness.
We consider the problem of rational secret sharing introduced by Halpern and Teague [1], where the players involved in secret sharing play only if it is to their advantage.This can be characterized in the form of preferences.Players would prefer to get the secret than to not get it and secondly with lesser preference, they would like as few other players to get the secret as possible.Several positive results have already been published to efficiently solve the problem of rational secret sharing but only a handful of papers have touched upon the use of an asynchronous broadcast channel.[2] used cryptographic primitives, [3] used an interactive dealer, and [4] used an honest minority of players in order to handle an asynchronous broadcast channel.In our paper, we propose an m-out-of-n rational secret sharing scheme which can function over an asynchronous broadcast channel without the use of cryptographic primitives and with a non-interactive dealer.This is possible because our scheme uses a small number, k+1, of honest players.The protocol is resilient to coalitions of size up to k and furthermore it is ε-resilient to coalitions of size up to and including m-1.The protocol will have a strict Nash equilibrium with probability Pr ( ାଵ ) and an ε-Nash equilibrium with probability Pr ( ିିଵ ) .Furthermore, our protocol is immune to backward induction.Later on in the paper, we extend our results to include malicious players as well.We also show that our protocol handles the possibility of a player deviating in order to force another player to get a wrong value in what we believe to be a more time efficient manner than was done in Asharov and Lindell [5].
Rational secret sharing was first introduced by Halpern and Teague (STOC, 2004). Since then, a series of works have focused on designing rational secret sharing protocols. However, most existing solutions can share only one secret at one secret sharing process. To share multiple secrets such as m secrets, the dealer must redistribute shares for m times. In addition, previous works assume existence of broadcast channel which is not realistic. Motivated by those problems, this paper proposes a rational multi-secret sharing scheme, which combines the secret sharing scheme with game theory. In the protocol, the problem of sharing multiple secrets is addressed, and there are multiple secrets to be shared during one secret sharing process. Furthermore, this work starts off by constructing a protocol in simultaneous broadcast networks, and then we emulate the broadcast channel over point-to-point networks. Based on a computational assumption, we show that rational players have no incentive to deviate from the protocol and every player can obtain multi-secret fairly.
We propose a new methodology for rational secret sharing leading to various instantiations (in both the two-party and multi-party settings) that are simple and efficient in terms of computation, share size, and round complexity. Our protocols do not require physical assumptions or simultaneous channels, and can even be run over asynchronous, point-to-point networks. We also propose new equilibrium notions (namely, computational versions of strict Nash equilibrium and stability with respect to trembles) and prove that our protocols satisfy them. These notions guarantee, roughly speaking, that at each point in the protocol there is a unique legal message a party can send. This, in turn, ensures that protocol messages cannot be used as subliminal channels, something achieved in prior work only by making strong assumptions on the communication network. 1
In the setting of ( , ) mn rational secret sharing, n rational players wish to share a secret s , arbitrarily m players can reconstruct it, they always choose the strategies which can bring them more utilities.The security requirement includes privacy, correctness and fairness.Fairness is a central objective of the rational secret sharing scheme, complete fair means either all players get the secret s or none of them get it, but most existing schemes do not meet this nature.In this work, a rational secret sharing protocol is proposed, which neither need particular communication channel, nor assume the existence of honest minority, in addition, the scheme can resist the collusion attack with () k k m players, and can achieve sequential equilibrium.Theoretical analysis shows that the proposed protocol is complete fair.
Abstract. Rational secret sharing was proposed by Halpern and Teague in [12]. The authors show that, in a setting with rational players, secret sharing and multiparty computation are only possible if the actual secret reconstruction round remains unknown to the players. All the subsequent works use a similar approach with different assumptions. We change the direction by bridging cryptography, game theory, and reputation systems, and propose a “social model ” for repeated rational secret sharing. We provide a novel scheme, named socio-rational secret sharing, in which players are invited to each game based on their reputations in the community. The players run secret sharing protocols while founding and sustaining a public trust network. As a result, new concepts such as a rational foresighted player, social game, and social Nash equilibrium are introduced. To motivate our approach, consider a repeated secret sharing game such as “secure auctions”, where the auctioneers receive sealed-bids from the bidders to compute the auction outcome without revealing the losing bids. If we assume each party has a reputation value, we can then penalize (or reward) the players who are selfish (or unselfish) from game to game. We show that this social reinforcement rationally stimulates the players to be cooperative.