In cryptographic protocols, honest parties would prefer that their security is assured even in presence of adversarial parties who have unbounded computational power. Information theoretic secure realization of cryptographic primitives provides such guarantees; but for most tasks such strong security guarantees cannot be provided for any reasonable notion of security. The standard technique used in cryptography is to assume the existence of some puzzle, whose hard instances are easy to generate but no efficient algorithm can solve them. Such assumptions, which define intractable problems for efficient algorithms, are called computational intractability assumptions.
In this work, we motivate a study of computational intractability assumptions which is goal driven and lends support to the fundamental nature of some of the traditional assumptions beyond being historical accidents. Secure multi-party computation deals with the study of constructing secure protocols for general cryptographic tasks which conform to various notions of security. Inspired by complexity theory, we use the notion of reduction to further our understanding of computational intractability assumptions. Our framework explores the hardness of natural assumptions of the form: “Task F can be securely computed given an ideally secure facility for computing G ”.
Formally, we characterize the minimal computational intractability assumption which is sufficient to securely realize a functionality using trusted copies of some other functionality. A functionality F reduces to G , similar to the complexity-theoretic notion of reduction, if F can be securely realized when parties can access trusted copies of G . Thus, if F does not reduce to G information-theoretically, we are interested in characterizing the minimal assumption, which is sufficient, to securely realize the reduction of F to G .
In our framework, we explore the relative strengths of these minimal computational assumptions. The fundamental problem, then, is to establish relations, like implication, equivalence and separation, among the assumptions which correspond to various reductions. In this work, we further our understanding of the minimal computational assumptions corresponding to such reductions by showing the following results:
1. We identify a spectrum for the set of assumptions that correspond to reduction between a pair of tasks under different security notions. These reductions are implied by the computational intractability assumption: “semi-honest secure protocol for oblivious transfer exists” (sh-OT assumption). Additionally, the information theoretically impossible reductions considered in this thesis imply the assumption: “one-way functions exist” (OWF assumption). We conjecture that OWF assumption is necessary for these reductions. In fact, the reductions considered in this thesis are either information theoretically true, false, equivalent to OWF assumption or equivalent to sh-OT assumption [MPR10a].
We expand our study to encompass reductions involving randomized functionalities and study the consequences of providing parties with a trusted source of common unbiased coins. For a strong notion of security they turn out to be useless and unless sh-OT assumption holds these randomness sources are not useful [MOPR11, MP11].
2. We [MPS10] seek to lend additional support to the widely believed premise that “non-trivial cryptography entails the existence of one-way functions”. We show that (constant round) weak coin-tossing protocols, imply OWF assumption. For the general problem, i.e. secure weak coin-tossing protocols with polynomial round complexity, we show a slightly weaker implication NP n BPP.
3. Finally, we indicate the possibility of a wide range of intractability assumptions in our spectrum, intermediate to OWF assumption and sh-OT assumption. We show that a class of natural assumptions corresponding to reductions that are relativistically separated from OWF assumption. Similar techniques have been used to show their separation from the assumption that “public-key encryption exists” (PKE assumption) [MMP11]; but these assumptions are not known to imply sh-OT assumption. We conjecture that, in fact, sh-OT assumption is relativistically separated from these assumptions.
In cryptographic protocols, honest parties would prefer that their security is assured even in presence of adversarial parties who have unbounded computational power. Information theoretic secure realization of cryptographic primitives provides such guarantees; but for most tasks such strong security guarantees cannot be provided for any reasonable notion of security. The standard technique used in cryptography is to assume the existence of some puzzle, whose hard instances are easy to generate but no efficient algorithm can solve them. Such assumptions, which define intractable problems for efficient algorithms, are called computational intractability assumptions.
In this work, we motivate a study of computational intractability assumptions which is goal driven and lends support to the fundamental nature of some of the traditional assumptions beyond being historical accidents. Secure multi-party computation deals with the study of constructing secure protocols for general cryptographic tasks which conform to various notions of security. Inspired by complexity theory, we use the notion of reduction to further our understanding of computational intractability assumptions. Our framework explores the hardness of natural assumptions of the form: “Task F can be securely computed given an ideally secure facility for computing G ”.
Formally, we characterize the minimal computational intractability assumption which is sufficient to securely realize a functionality using trusted copies of some other functionality. A functionality F reduces to G , similar to the complexity-theoretic notion of reduction, if F can be securely realized when parties can access trusted copies of G . Thus, if F does not reduce to G information-theoretically, we are interested in characterizing the minimal assumption, which is sufficient, to securely realize the reduction of F to G .
In our framework, we explore the relative strengths of these minimal computational assumptions. The fundamental problem, then, is to establish relations, like implication, equivalence and separation, among the assumptions which correspond to various reductions. In this work, we further our understanding of the minimal computational assumptions corresponding to such reductions by showing the following results:
We identify a spectrum for the set of assumptions that correspond to reduction between a pair of tasks under different security notions. These reductions are implied by the computational intractability assumption: “semi-honest secure protocol for oblivious transfer exists” (sh-OT assumption). Additionally, the information theoretically impossible reductions considered in this thesis imply the assumption: “one-way functions exist” (OWF assumption). We conjecture that OWF assumption is necessary for these reductions. In fact, the reductions considered in this thesis are either information theoretically true, false, equivalent to OWF assumption or equivalent to sh-OT assumption [MPR10a].
We expand our study to encompass reductions involving randomized functionalities and study the consequences of providing parties with a trusted source of common unbiased coins. For a strong notion of security they turn out to be useless and unless sh-OT assumption holds these randomness sources are not useful [MOPR11, MP11].
We [MPS10] seek to lend additional support to the widely believed premise that “non-trivial cryptography entails the existence of one-way functions”. We show that (constant round) weak coin-tossing protocols, imply OWF assumption. For the general problem, i.e. secure weak coin-tossing protocols with polynomial round complexity, we show a slightly weaker implication NP n BPP.
Finally, we indicate the possibility of a wide range of intractability assumptions in our spectrum, intermediate to OWF assumption and sh-OT assumption. We show that a class of natural assumptions corresponding to reductions that are relativistically separated from OWF assumption. Similar techniques have been used to show their separation from the assumption that “public-key encryption exists” (PKE assumption) [MMP11]; but these assumptions are not known to imply sh-OT assumption. We conjecture that, in fact, sh-OT assumption is relativistically separated from these assumptions.
Which computational complexity assumptions are inherent to cryptography? We present a broad framework to pose and investigate this question. We first aim to understand the “cryptographic complexity ” of various tasks, independent of any computational assumptions. In our framework the cryptographic tasks are modeled as multi-party computation functionalities. We consider a universally composable secure protocol for one task given access to another task as the most natural complexity reduction between the two tasks. Some of these cryptographic complexity reductions are unconditional, others are unconditionally non-existent, but the vast majority appear to depend on computational assumptions; it is this relationship with computational assumptions that we study. In our detailed investigation of large classes of 2-party functionalities, we find that every reduction we are able to classify turns out to be unconditionally true or false, or else equivalent to the existence of one-way functions (OWF) or of semi-honest (equivalently, standalone-secure) oblivious transfer protocols (sh-OT). This leads us to conjecture that there are only a small finite number of distinct (i.e., black-box separable) computational assump-tions that are inherent among the infinite number of different cryptographic reductions in our framework. On moving to 3-party functionalities, there does exist a natural computational assumption, distinct from the OWF and sh-OT assumptions (namely, the existence of a key agreement protocol) that manifests itself as a cryptographic
Modern Cryptography is based on computational intractability assumptions, e.g., Factoring, Discrete Logarithm, Diffie-Helman etc. However, since an assumption might be proven incorrect, there has been a lot of focus in order to construct cryptographic primitives based on the possibly most minimal assumption. The most popular minimal assumption, which is implied by the existence of almost all cryptographic primitives, is the existence of One Way Functions. Coin-Flipping protocols are known to be implied by One-Way Functions, however, a complete characterization of the inverse direction is not known. There was even speculation that weak notions of Coin Flipping Protocols might be strictly weaker than One Way Functions. In this thesis we show that even very weak notions of Coin Flipping protocols do imply One Way Functions. In particular we show that the existence of a coin-flipping protocol safe against any non-trivial constant bias (e.g., .499) implies the existence of One Way Functions. This improves upon a recent result of Haitner and Omri [FOCS ’11], who proved this implication for protocols with bias √ 2−1 2 − o(1) ≈ .207. Unlike the former result result, our result also holds for weak coin-flipping protocols.
We use security in the Universal Composition framework as a means to study the “cryptographic complexity ” of 2-party secure computation tasks (functionalities). We say that a functionality F reduces to another functionality G if there is a UC-secure protocol for F using ideal access to G. This reduction is a natural and fine-grained way to compare the relative complexities of cryptographic tasks. There are two natural “extremes ” of complexity under the reduction: the trivial functionalities, which can be reduced to any other functionality; and the complete functionalities, to which any other functionality can be reduced. In this work we show that under a natural computational assumption (the existence of a protocol for oblivious transfer secure against semi-honest adversaries), there is a zero-one law for the cryptographic complexity of 2-party deterministic functionalities. Namely, every such functionality is either trivial or complete. No other qualitative distinctions exist among functionalities, under this computational assumption. While nearly all previous work classifying multi-party computation functionalities has been restricted to the case of secure function evaluation, our results are the first to consider completeness of arbitrary reactive functionalities, which receive input and give output repeatedly throughout several rounds of interaction. One important technical contribution in this work is to initiate the comprehensive study of the cryptographic properties of reactive functionalities. We model these functionalities as finite automata and develop an automata-theoretic methodology for classifying and studying their cryptographic properties. Consequently, we completely characterize the reactive behaviors that lead to cryptographic non-triviality.
Abstract. Understanding the minimal assumptions required for carrying out cryptographic tasks is one of the fundamental goals of theoretical cryptography. A rich body of work has been dedicated to understanding the complexity of cryptographic tasks in the context of (semi-honest) secure two-party computation. Much of this work has focused on the characterization of trivial and complete functionalities (resp., functionalities that can be securely implemented unconditionally, and functionalities that can be used to securely compute all functionalities). All previous works define reductions via an ideal implementation of the functionality; i.e., f reduces to g if one can implement f using an ideal box (or oracle) that computes the function g and returns the output to both parties. Such a reduction models the computation of f as an atomic operation. However, in the real-world, protocols proceed in rounds, and the output is not learned by the parties simultaneously. In this paper we show that this distinction is significant. Specifically, we show that there exist symmetric functionalities (where both parties receive the same outcome), that are neither trivial nor complete under “ideal-box reductions”, and yet the existence of a constant-round protocol for securely computing such a functionality implies infinitely-often oblivious transfer (meaning that it is secure for infinitely-many n’s). In light of the above, we propose an alternative definitional infrastructure for studying the triviality and completeness of functionalities. 1
Secure multi-party computation is a conceptual framework in which distrusting parties engage in a protocol to securely perform a computational task. Depending on the precise model of security, different sets of tasks admit secure protocols. We take a complexity-theoretic approach to studying the inherent difficulty of securely realizing tasks in various standard security models. * We give the first alternate characterization of secure realizability in the framework of universally composable (UC) security. This is the first characterization in any model to consider completely arbitrary computational tasks and completely arbitrary communication channels. * The most long-standing class of computational tasks studied are those in which two parties evaluate a deterministic function. For these tasks, we give the first complete, combinatorial characterizations of secure realizability in the passive, standalone, and universally composable security models, against computationally unbounded adversaries. * Say that a task G has ``as much cryptographic complexity'' as another task F if there is a secure protocol for F that uses access to a secure implementation of G. We show that there is an infinite hierarchy of tasks with strictly increasing cryptographic complexities, with respect to computationally unbounded security. We also show that there exist tasks whose cryptographic complexities are incomparable. * In contrast, we show that under a standard cryptographic assumption, there exist only two distinct levels of cryptographic complexity with respect to polynomial-time security. Every task either has a trivial protocol using plain communication channels, or is complete (i.e., given access to a secure implementation of this task, there are secure protocols for all other tasks). This is the first result to derive a characterization of completeness for a class of arbitrary interactive tasks. In light of these characterizations, the only tasks which are securely realizable in the demanding framework of universal composition are those related to secure communication. Indeed, the framework has been used to define the security of encryption schemes, which has allowed for modular design and analysis of protocols. We consider a similar approach for homomorphic encryption schemes. A homomorphic scheme is one in which anyone can obtain an encryption of f(m_1, ..., m_n), given only the encryptions of unknown messages m_1, ..., m_n, for a specific set of functions f. * We give a construction of a homomorphic encryption scheme in which the allowed homomorphic operation is as full-featured as possible --- namely, one can derive a correctly-distributed encryption of f(m) given an encryption of unknown message m, for some functions f --- yet it is computationally infeasible to generate a ciphertext that is related to other ciphertexts in any other way. Our contributions involve developing new appropriate security definitions as well as new constructions. * We show that schemes with such powerful security guarantees can be used to build conceptually simple, efficient, UC-secure protocols for verifiable computations on encrypted data. We show protocols for two tasks related to aggregating encrypted data.
Coin flipping is one of the most fundamental tasks in cryptographic protocol design. Informally, a coin flipping protocol should guarantee both (1) Completeness: an honest execution of the protocol by both parties results in a fair coin toss, and (2) Security: a cheating party cannot increase the probability of its desired outcome by any significant amount. Since its introduction by Blum, coin flipping has occupied a central place in the theory of cryptographic protocols. In this paper, we explore what are the implications of the existence of secure coin flipping protocols for complexity theory. As exposited recently by Impagliazzo, surprisingly little is known about this question. Previous work has shown that if we interpret the Security property of coin flipping protocols very strongly, namely that nothing beyond a negligible bias by cheating parties is allowed, then one-way functions must exist. However, for even a slight weakening of this security property (for example that cheating parties cannot bias the outcome by any additive constant ε > 0), the only complexity-theoretic implication that was known was that PSPACE ⊈ BPP. We put forward a new attack to establish our main result, which shows that, informally speaking, the existence of any (weak) coin flipping protocol that prevents a cheating adversary from biasing the output by more than 1/4 - ε implies that NP ⊈ BPP. Furthermore, for constant-round protocols, we show that the existence of any (weak) coin flipping protocol that allows an honest party to maintain any noticeable chance of prevailing against a cheating party implies the existence of (infinitely often) one-way functions.