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

Foundations of Secure Computation: Perfect Security and Fairness

Gilad Asharov

Published Jan 1, 2014• 0 citations
OpenAlex

Abstract

In the setting of secure multiparty computation, several distrustful parties wish to carry out a distributed computing task on their local private data while satisfying several security properties such as correctness, privacy, independence of inputs and fairness. The aim of secure multiparty computation (MPC) is to enable the parties to carry out the computation in a secure manner, eliminating any attempt of an adversarial entity to harm the execution. The concept of secure computation is very general and fundamental in cryptography, and models any distributed computing task, including simple computations as coin-tossing and broadcast, as well as more complex tasks such as electronic auctions and anonymous transactions. In this thesis, we study two foundational aspects of secure computation: perfect security and fairness. In the first part of this thesis, we study perfect security in secure computation. A protocol that is perfectly secure cannot be broken even when the adversary has unlimited computational power and its security holds unconditionally. One of the most fundamental results of secure computation was presented by Ben-Or, Goldwasser and Wigderson (BGW) in 1988. They demonstrated that any n-party functionality can be computed with perfect security, in the private channels model. When the adversary is semi-honest this holds as long as t < n/2 parties are corrupted, and when the adversary is malicious this holds as long as t < n/3 parties are corrupted. Unfortunately, a full proof of these results was never published. In this thesis, we remedy this situation and provide a full proof of security of the BGW protocol. This also includes a full description of the protocol for the malicious setting. In addition to the above, we observe that by some simple and natural modifications, the BGW protocol can be significantly simplified and one of its expensive (and perhaps most complicated) subprotocols can be saved. We present a new multiplication protocol that is based on the original construction, but is simpler and achieves higher efficiency. In the second part of this thesis, we study fairness in secure two party computation. Informally, the fairness property guarantees that if one party receives its output, then the other party does too. The well-known impossibility result of Cleve (STOC 1986) implies that, in general, it is impossible to securely compute a function with complete fairness without an honest majority. Until recently, the accepted belief has been that nothing non-trivial can be computed with complete fairness in the two party setting. The surprising work of Gordon, Hazay, Katz and Lindell (STOC 2008) shows that this belief is false, and that there exist some non-trivial (deterministic, finite-domain) Boolean functions that can be computed fairly. This raises the fundamental question of characterizing complete fairness in secure two-party computation. We focus on this question and give both positive and negative results. We first characterize

Related papers

A Full Proof of the BGW Protocol for Perfectly-Secure Multiparty Computation.

Gilad Asharov, Yehuda Lindell

In the setting of secure multiparty computation, a set of n parties with private inputs wish to jointly compute some functionality of their inputs. One of the most fundamental results of information-theoretically secure computation was presented by Ben-Or, Goldwasser and Wigderson (BGW) in 1988. They demonstrated that any n-party functionality can be computed with perfect security, in the private channels model. When the adversary is semi-honest this holds as long as t < n/2 parties are corrupted, and when the adversary is malicious this holds as long as t < n/3 parties are corrupted. Unfortunately, a full detailed proof of these results was never given. In this paper, we remedy this situation and provide a full proof of security of the BGW protocol. We also derive corollaries for security in the presence of adaptive adversaries and under concurrent general composition (equivalently, universal composability). In addition, we give a full specification of the protocol for the malicious setting. This includes one new step

Electronic colloquium on computational complexity•Jan 1, 2011•23 citations

The BGW Protocol for Perfectly-Secure Multiparty Computation

Gilad Asharov, Yehuda Lindell

One of the most fundamental results of secure computation was presented by Ben-Or, Goldwasser and Wigderson (BGW) in 1988. They demonstrated that any n-party functionality can be computed with perfect security, in the private channels model. When the adversary is semi-honest this holds as long as t < n/2 parties are corrupted, and when the adversary is malicious this holds as long as t < n/3 parties are corrupted. In this chapter, we present a full description of the BGW protocol for the semi-honest and malicious settings, along with detailed explanations and intuition regarding the security of the protocols; full proofs can be found in [1].

IOS Press eBooks•Jan 1, 2013•2 citations

Secure Multiparty Computation with Dynamic Participants and Guaranteed Output

Giovanni Deligios

Secure Multiparty Computation (MPC) is an expression encompassing cryptographic techniques that allow mutually distrustful parties to jointly perform computations over private data, ensuring correctness and preserving privacy despite malicious behavior. Guaranteed output is the strongest security goal for MPC: protocols with this property always deliver results. This is in contrast with weaker notions that allow malicious aborts. The seminal works of Ben-Or, Goldwasser, and Wigderson (STOC’88) and Rabin and Ben-Or (STOC’89) showed interactive protocols to compute any function with guaranteed output and perfect security if fewer than one third of parties are corrupted, or with statistical security (with a small error probability) if fewer than half are corrupted. These results hold when the set of participants is fixed throughout the execution. Ostrovsky and Yung’s proactive model (PODC’91) relaxes this assumption by allowing the set of corrupted parties to evolve over time, better capturing the dynamics of long-lived computations, where machines may be periodically compromised and recovered. The recent YOSO (You Only Speak Once) and fluid MPC models (CRYPTO’21) push this ambitious modelling even further by allowing for fully dynamic participation, with parties joining and leaving the computation at will. In this setting, known protocols with guaranteed output fall short of optimal resilience or rely on non-standard communication and adversarial assumptions. Matching the classical BGW and Rabin–Ben-Or bounds in these settings remained an open problem. We resolve these questions within the Layered MPC abstraction of David et al. (CRYPTO’23), in which the interaction pattern of a protocol is restricted to be a layered graph, meaning parties are partitioned into a sequence of disjoint sets (layers) and can send private and broadcast messages to parties in immediately subsequent layers. We match the BGW and Rabin and Ben-Or bounds in this model, fully characterizing the feasibility landscape of Layered MPC with guaranteed output. As a stepping stone towards our statistically secure protocol, we construct a more efficient and conceptually simpler computationally secure protocol relying on linear non-interactive commitments. Our results yield optimally-resilient and maximally-proactive MPC protocols with guaranteed output for both perfect and statistical security.

•Jan 1, 2025•0 citations

Secure Multiparty Computation with Partial Fairness

Amos Beimel, Eran Omri, Ilan Orlov

A protocol for computing a functionality is secure if an adversary in this protocol cannot cause more harm than in an ideal computation where parties give their inputs to a trusted party which returns the output of the functionality to all parties. In particular, in the ideal model such computation is fair -- all parties get the output. Cleve (STOC 1986) proved that, in general, fairness is not possible without an honest majority. To overcome this impossibility, Gordon and Katz (Eurocrypt 2010) suggested a relaxed definition -- 1/p-secure computation -- which guarantees partial fairness. For two parties, they construct 1/p-secure protocols for functionalities for which the size of either their domain or their range is polynomial (in the security parameter). Gordon and Katz ask whether their results can be extended to multiparty protocols. We study 1/p-secure protocols in the multiparty setting for general functionalities. Our main result is constructions of 1/p-secure protocols when the number of parties is constant provided that less than 2/3 of the parties are corrupt. Our protocols require that either (1) the functionality is deterministic and the size of the domain is polynomial (in the security parameter), or (2) the functionality can be randomized and the size of the range is polynomial. If the size of the domain is constant and the functionality is deterministic, then our protocol is efficient even when the number of parties is O(log log n) (where n is the security parameter). On the negative side, we show that when the number of parties is super-constant, 1/p-secure protocols are not possible when the size of the domain is polynomial.

arXiv:1011.5567•Nov 25, 2010•0 citations

Complete Fairness in Secure Two-Party Computation.

Steven Gordon, Carmit Hazay, Jonathan I. Katz +1 more

In the setting of secure two-party computation, two mutually distrusting parties wish to compute some function of their inputs while preserving, to the extent possible, various security properties such as privacy, correctness, and more. One desirable property is fairness which guarantees, informally, that if one party receives its output, then the other party does too. Cleve (STOC 1986) showed that complete fairness cannot be achieved in general without an honest majority. Since then, the accepted folklore has been that nothing non-trivial can be computed with complete fairness in the two-party setting, and the problem has been treated as closed since the late ’80s. In this paper, we demonstrate that this folklore belief is false by showing completely-fair protocols for various non-trivial functions in the two-party setting based on standard cryptographic assumptions. We first show feasibility of obtaining complete fairness when computing any function over polynomial-size domains that does not contain an “embedded XOR”; this class of functions includes boolean AND/OR as well as Yao’s “millionaires ’ problem”. We also demonstrate feasibility for certain functions that do contain an embedded XOR, and prove a lower bound showing that any completely-fair protocol for such functions must have round complexity super-logarithmic in the security parameter. Our results demonstrate that the question of completely-fair secure computation without an honest majority is far from closed.

•Jan 1, 2008•26 citations

Complete Fairness in Secure Two-Party Computation

Steven Gordon, Carmit Hazay, Jonathan I. Katz +1 more

In the setting of secure two-party computation, two mutually distrusting parties wish to compute some function of their inputs while preserving, to the extent possible, various security properties such as privacy, correctness, and more. One desirable property is fairness which guarantees, informally, that if one party receives its output, then the other party does too. Cleve [1986] showed that complete fairness cannot be achieved in general without an honest majority. Since then, the accepted folklore has been that nothing non-trivial can be computed with complete fairness in the two-party setting. We demonstrate that this folklore belief is false by showing completely fair protocols for various nontrivial functions in the two-party setting based on standard cryptographic assumptions. We first show feasibility of obtaining complete fairness when computing any function over polynomial-size domains that does not contain an “embedded XOR”; this class of functions includes boolean AND/OR as well as Yao’s “millionaires’ problem”. We also demonstrate feasibility for certain functions that do contain an embedded XOR, though we prove a lower bound showing that any completely fair protocol for such functions must have round complexity super-logarithmic in the security parameter. Our results demonstrate that the question of completely fair secure computation without an honest majority is far from closed.

Journal of the ACM•Dec 1, 2011•72 citations
In the setting of secure multiparty computation, several distrustful parties wish to carry out a distributed computing task on their local private data while satisfying several security properties such as correctness, privacy, independence of inputs and fairness. The aim of secure multiparty computation (MPC) is to enable the parties to carry out the computation in a secure manner, eliminating any attempt of an adversarial entity to harm the execution. The concept of secure computation is very general and fundamental in cryptography, and models any distributed computing task, including simple computations as coin-tossing and broadcast, as well as more complex tasks such as electronic auctions and anonymous transactions. In this thesis, we study two foundational aspects of secure computation: perfect security and fairness. In the first part of this thesis, we study perfect security in secure computation. A protocol that is perfectly secure cannot be broken even when the adversary has unlimited computational power and its security holds unconditionally. One of the most fundamental results of secure computation was presented by Ben-Or, Goldwasser and Wigderson (BGW) in 1988. They demonstrated that any n-party functionality can be computed with perfect security, in the private channels model. When the adversary is semi-honest this holds as long as t < n/2 parties are corrupted, and when the adversary is malicious this holds as long as t < n/3 parties are corrupted. Unfortunately, a full proof of these results was never published. In this thesis, we remedy this situation and provide a full proof of security of the BGW protocol. This also includes a full description of the protocol for the malicious setting. In addition to the above, we observe that by some simple and natural modifications, the BGW protocol can be significantly simplified and one of its expensive (and perhaps most complicated) subprotocols can be saved. We present a new multiplication protocol that is based on the original construction, but is simpler and achieves higher efficiency. In the second part of this thesis, we study fairness in secure two party computation. Informally, the fairness property guarantees that if one party receives its output, then the other party does too. The well-known impossibility result of Cleve (STOC 1986) implies that, in general, it is impossible to securely compute a function with complete fairness without an honest majority. Until recently, the accepted belief has been that nothing non-trivial can be computed with complete fairness in the two party setting. The surprising work of Gordon, Hazay, Katz and Lindell (STOC 2008) shows that this belief is false, and that there exist some non-trivial (deterministic, finite-domain) Boolean functions that can be computed fairly. This raises the fundamental question of characterizing complete fairness in secure two-party computation. We focus on this question and give both positive and negative results. We first characterize
In the setting of secure multiparty computation, a set of n parties with private inputs wish to jointly compute some functionality of their inputs. One of the most fundamental results of information-theoretically secure computation was presented by Ben-Or, Goldwasser and Wigderson (BGW) in 1988. They demonstrated that any n-party functionality can be computed with perfect security, in the private channels model. When the adversary is semi-honest this holds as long as t < n/2 parties are corrupted, and when the adversary is malicious this holds as long as t < n/3 parties are corrupted. Unfortunately, a full detailed proof of these results was never given. In this paper, we remedy this situation and provide a full proof of security of the BGW protocol. We also derive corollaries for security in the presence of adaptive adversaries and under concurrent general composition (equivalently, universal composability). In addition, we give a full specification of the protocol for the malicious setting. This includes one new step
One of the most fundamental results of secure computation was presented by Ben-Or, Goldwasser and Wigderson (BGW) in 1988. They demonstrated that any n-party functionality can be computed with perfect security, in the private channels model. When the adversary is semi-honest this holds as long as t < n/2 parties are corrupted, and when the adversary is malicious this holds as long as t < n/3 parties are corrupted. In this chapter, we present a full description of the BGW protocol for the semi-honest and malicious settings, along with detailed explanations and intuition regarding the security of the protocols; full proofs can be found in [1].
Secure Multiparty Computation (MPC) is an expression encompassing cryptographic techniques that allow mutually distrustful parties to jointly perform computations over private data, ensuring correctness and preserving privacy despite malicious behavior. Guaranteed output is the strongest security goal for MPC: protocols with this property always deliver results. This is in contrast with weaker notions that allow malicious aborts. The seminal works of Ben-Or, Goldwasser, and Wigderson (STOC’88) and Rabin and Ben-Or (STOC’89) showed interactive protocols to compute any function with guaranteed output and perfect security if fewer than one third of parties are corrupted, or with statistical security (with a small error probability) if fewer than half are corrupted. These results hold when the set of participants is fixed throughout the execution. Ostrovsky and Yung’s proactive model (PODC’91) relaxes this assumption by allowing the set of corrupted parties to evolve over time, better capturing the dynamics of long-lived computations, where machines may be periodically compromised and recovered. The recent YOSO (You Only Speak Once) and fluid MPC models (CRYPTO’21) push this ambitious modelling even further by allowing for fully dynamic participation, with parties joining and leaving the computation at will. In this setting, known protocols with guaranteed output fall short of optimal resilience or rely on non-standard communication and adversarial assumptions. Matching the classical BGW and Rabin–Ben-Or bounds in these settings remained an open problem. We resolve these questions within the Layered MPC abstraction of David et al. (CRYPTO’23), in which the interaction pattern of a protocol is restricted to be a layered graph, meaning parties are partitioned into a sequence of disjoint sets (layers) and can send private and broadcast messages to parties in immediately subsequent layers. We match the BGW and Rabin and Ben-Or bounds in this model, fully characterizing the feasibility landscape of Layered MPC with guaranteed output. As a stepping stone towards our statistically secure protocol, we construct a more efficient and conceptually simpler computationally secure protocol relying on linear non-interactive commitments. Our results yield optimally-resilient and maximally-proactive MPC protocols with guaranteed output for both perfect and statistical security.
A protocol for computing a functionality is secure if an adversary in this protocol cannot cause more harm than in an ideal computation where parties give their inputs to a trusted party which returns the output of the functionality to all parties. In particular, in the ideal model such computation is fair -- all parties get the output. Cleve (STOC 1986) proved that, in general, fairness is not possible without an honest majority. To overcome this impossibility, Gordon and Katz (Eurocrypt 2010) suggested a relaxed definition -- 1/p-secure computation -- which guarantees partial fairness. For two parties, they construct 1/p-secure protocols for functionalities for which the size of either their domain or their range is polynomial (in the security parameter). Gordon and Katz ask whether their results can be extended to multiparty protocols. We study 1/p-secure protocols in the multiparty setting for general functionalities. Our main result is constructions of 1/p-secure protocols when the number of parties is constant provided that less than 2/3 of the parties are corrupt. Our protocols require that either (1) the functionality is deterministic and the size of the domain is polynomial (in the security parameter), or (2) the functionality can be randomized and the size of the range is polynomial. If the size of the domain is constant and the functionality is deterministic, then our protocol is efficient even when the number of parties is O(log log n) (where n is the security parameter). On the negative side, we show that when the number of parties is super-constant, 1/p-secure protocols are not possible when the size of the domain is polynomial.
In the setting of secure two-party computation, two mutually distrusting parties wish to compute some function of their inputs while preserving, to the extent possible, various security properties such as privacy, correctness, and more. One desirable property is fairness which guarantees, informally, that if one party receives its output, then the other party does too. Cleve (STOC 1986) showed that complete fairness cannot be achieved in general without an honest majority. Since then, the accepted folklore has been that nothing non-trivial can be computed with complete fairness in the two-party setting, and the problem has been treated as closed since the late ’80s. In this paper, we demonstrate that this folklore belief is false by showing completely-fair protocols for various non-trivial functions in the two-party setting based on standard cryptographic assumptions. We first show feasibility of obtaining complete fairness when computing any function over polynomial-size domains that does not contain an “embedded XOR”; this class of functions includes boolean AND/OR as well as Yao’s “millionaires ’ problem”. We also demonstrate feasibility for certain functions that do contain an embedded XOR, and prove a lower bound showing that any completely-fair protocol for such functions must have round complexity super-logarithmic in the security parameter. Our results demonstrate that the question of completely-fair secure computation without an honest majority is far from closed.
In the setting of secure two-party computation, two mutually distrusting parties wish to compute some function of their inputs while preserving, to the extent possible, various security properties such as privacy, correctness, and more. One desirable property is fairness which guarantees, informally, that if one party receives its output, then the other party does too. Cleve [1986] showed that complete fairness cannot be achieved in general without an honest majority. Since then, the accepted folklore has been that nothing non-trivial can be computed with complete fairness in the two-party setting. We demonstrate that this folklore belief is false by showing completely fair protocols for various nontrivial functions in the two-party setting based on standard cryptographic assumptions. We first show feasibility of obtaining complete fairness when computing any function over polynomial-size domains that does not contain an “embedded XOR”; this class of functions includes boolean AND/OR as well as Yao’s “millionaires’ problem”. We also demonstrate feasibility for certain functions that do contain an embedded XOR, though we prove a lower bound showing that any completely fair protocol for such functions must have round complexity super-logarithmic in the security parameter. Our results demonstrate that the question of completely fair secure computation without an honest majority is far from closed.