Challenges
Datasets
Workspaces
Papers
Discussions
Leaderboard
Log inSign up
Challenges
Datasets
Workspaces
Papers
Discussions
Leaderboard
Blog
Job Board
Q3AS

© 2026 Aqora Quantum S.A.S.

TermsPrivacyLegal Notice

Information Processing Letters

On insecurity of Naor–Pinkas' distributed oblivious transfer

Hossein Ghodosi

Published Jun 23, 2007• 4 citations
Publisher
DOI
10.1016/j.ipl.2007.05.016

Related papers

A Variant of Naor-Pinkas Oblivious Transfer for More Efficient Authentication

Yongsoo Hwang, Hyochul Chae, Moongu Jeon

Communications in computer and information science•Jan 1, 2010•0 citations

Non-committing Encryptions Based on Oblivious Naor-Pinkas Cryptosystems

Huafei Zhu, Feng Bao

Lecture notes in computer science•Jan 1, 2009•4 citations

Communication-efficient distributed oblivious transfer

BeimelAmos, CheeYeow Meng, WangHuaxiong +1 more

Distributed oblivious transfer (DOT) was introduced by Naor and Pinkas (2000) [31], and then generalized to (k,@__ __)-DOT-(n1) by Blundo et al. (2007) [8] and Nikov et al. (2002) [34]. In the gene...

Journal of Computer and System Sciences•Jul 1, 2012•0 citations

Verifiable Oblivious Transfer Protocol

N.-Y. LEE

The Oblivious Transfer (OT), introduced by Rabin in 1981, has become an important and fundamental cryptography technique. An OT protocol should have two important characteristics: sender's privacy and chooser's privacy. The sender is a party who will deliver a secret to chooser. The chooser is another party who acts as receiver to learn some information about input from sender. The chooser learns of certain information concerning sender's input while sender is not allowed to know what chooser has learned. Moreover, chooser cannot acquire any messages that he/she did not choose. Naor and Pinkas have recently proposed an efficient oblivious transfer protocol (EOT) that implementes 1-out-of-n protocol, but this EOT has a flaw: it cannot withstand the same message attack. In this paper, we will improve Naor and Pinkas EOT and make it resistant to the same message attack.

IEICE Transactions on Information and Systems•Dec 1, 2005•2 citations

Distributed Oblivious Transfer

Moni Naor, Benny Pinkas B

Lecture notes in computer science•Jan 1, 2000•105 citations

Strengthening the Security of Distributed Oblivious Transfer

Kai-Yuen Cheong, Koshiba Takeshi, Shohei Nishiyama

電子情報通信学会技術研究報告. COMP, コンピュテーション•May 19, 2009•2 citations
The Oblivious Transfer (OT), introduced by Rabin in 1981, has become an important and fundamental cryptography technique. An OT protocol should have two important characteristics: sender's privacy and chooser's privacy. The sender is a party who will deliver a secret to chooser. The chooser is another party who acts as receiver to learn some information about input from sender. The chooser learns of certain information concerning sender's input while sender is not allowed to know what chooser has learned. Moreover, chooser cannot acquire any messages that he/she did not choose. Naor and Pinkas have recently proposed an efficient oblivious transfer protocol (EOT) that implementes 1-out-of-n protocol, but this EOT has a flaw: it cannot withstand the same message attack. In this paper, we will improve Naor and Pinkas EOT and make it resistant to the same message attack.