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

On adaptive vs. non-adaptive security of multiparty protocols.

Ran Canetti, Ivan Damgård, Stefan Dziembowski, Yuval Ishai, Tal Malkin

Published Jan 1, 2001• 9 citations
OpenAlex

Abstract

Security analysis of multiparty cryptographic protocols distinguishes between two types of adversarial settings: In the non-adaptive setting, the set of corrupted parties is chosen in advance, before the interaction begins. In the adaptive setting, the adversary chooses who to corrupt during the course of the computation. We study the relations between adaptive security (i.e., security in the adaptive setting) and non-adaptive security, according to two definitions and in several models of computation. While affirming some prevailing beliefs, we also obtain some unexpected results. Some highlights of our results are: . According to the definition of Dodis-Micali-Rogaway (which is set in the information-theoretic model), adaptive and non-adaptive security are equivalent. This holds for both honest-but-curious and Byzantine adversaries, and for any number of parties. . According to the definition of Canetti, for honest-but-curious adversaries, adaptive security is equivalent to...

Related papers

Security and Composition of Multi-party Cryptographic Protocols.

Ran Canetti

We present general definitions of security for multi-party cryptographic protocols, with focus on the task of evaluating a probabilistic function of the parties' inputs. We show that, with respect to these definitions, security is preserved under a natural composition operation. The definitions follow the general paradigm of known definitions; yet some substantial modifications and simplifications are introduced. The composition operation is the natural `subroutine substitution' operation, formalized by Micali and Rogaway. We consider several standard settings for multi-party protocols, including the cases of eavesdropping, Byzantine, non-adaptive and adaptive adversaries, as well as the information-theoretic and the computational models. In particular, in the computational model we provide the first definition of security of protocols that is shown to be preserved under composition.

•Jan 1, 1998•80 citations

Adaptively Secure Two-Party Computation with Erasures.

Yehuda Lindell

In the setting of multiparty computation a set of parties with private inputs wish to compute some joint function of their inputs, whilst preserving certain security properties (like privacy and correctness). An adaptively secure protocol is one in which the security properties are preserved even if an adversary can adaptively and dynamically corrupt parties during a computation. This provides a high level of security, that is arguably necessary in today’s world of active computer break-ins. Until now, the work on adaptively secure multiparty computation has focused almost exclusively on the setting of an honest majority, and very few works have considered the honest minority and two-party cases. In addition, significant computational and communication costs are incurred by most protocols that achieve adaptive security. In this work, we consider the two-party setting and assume that honest parties may erase data. We show that in this model it is possible to securely compute any two-party functionality in the presence of adaptive semi-honest adversaries. Furthermore, our protocol remains secure under concurrent general composition (meaning that it remains secure irrespective of the other protocols running together with it). Our protocol is based on Yao’s garbled-circuit construction and, importantly, is as efficient as the analogous protocol for static corruptions. We argue that the model of adaptive corruptions with erasures has been unjustifiably neglected and that it deserves much more attention. 1

•Jan 1, 2009•0 citations

Adaptively secure multi-party computation

Ran Canetti, Uri Feige, Oded Goldreich +1 more

A fundamental problem in designing secure multi-party protocols is how to deal with adaptive adversaries (i.e., adversaries that may choose the corrupted parties during the course of the computation), in a setting where the channels are insecure and secure communication is achieved by cryptographic primitives based on the computational limitations of the adversary.

ACM Symposium on Theory of Computing (STOC)•Jan 1, 1996•556 citations

On adaptive security and round efficiency in secure multi-party computation

Tal Malkin, Seung Geol Choi

Secure multi-party computation (MPC) enables distrustful parties to jointly perform computations while guaranteeing both the privacy of their inputs and the correctness of the computation. This thesis explores two aspects of secure multi-party computation: adaptive security and round efficiency. Adaptive security is concerned with an adversary that adaptively determines who and when to corrupt during the course of the computation. Even though this is a very natural and realistic assumption about the adversary, most of the MPC literature addresses security only against a static adversary — an adversary that chooses (and fixes) which parties to corrupt before the protocol starts executing. A protocol is called round-efficient if it runs in a small number of rounds. Constructing such protocols is important since efficiency of a protocol is greatly influenced by its round complexity. The security in this thesis is formulated in the universal composability (UC) framework introduced by Canetti [Can01]. Protocols secure in the UC framework remain secure even when executed concurrently with other arbitrary protocols running in some larger network, and can be used as subroutines of larger protocols in a modular fashion. This property is important considering that nowadays many protocols are executed concurrently with others in the Internet. With the focus on adaptive security and round efficiency, we obtain the following results: (1) We show that with access to an ideal commitment functionality, there exists a protocol that UC realizes any well-formed multi-party functionality against a malicious, adaptive adversary that may corrupt any number of parties, with black-box access to any protocol that UC realizes oblivious transfer against a semi-honest, adaptive adversary. (2) We show that there exists a protocol that UC realizes oblivious transfer against a semi-honest, adaptive adversary, with black-box access to a cryptographic primitive called a trapdoor simulatable cryptosystem, which is a natural relaxation of a simulatable cryptosystem introduced by Damgard and Nielsen [3N00]. We also show that the primitive can be constructed based on hardness of factoring. (3) We present a single-message protocol that UC realizes two-party computing with encrypted data (a variant of secure two-party computation), based on the DDH assumption and non- interactive zero-knowledge arguments. The protocol achieves security against a malicious, static adversary. (4) We present two round-efficient protocols that UC realize multi-party computing with encrypted data (a variant of secure multi-party computation), based on the DDH assumption and non-interactive zero-knowledge arguments. The first (resp. second) protocol requires one round (resp. two rounds) with appropriate preprocessing, which is independent of the exact circuit and actual inputs of the specific instance problem to solve — only the bound on the circuit size is known. Although the first protocol is more round-efficient, the preprocessing of the second is sometimes better under some efficiency considerations. Both protocols achieve security against a malicious, static adversary that may corrupt up to all but one parties.

•Jan 1, 2010•0 citations

(Unconditional) Secure Multiparty Computation with Man-in-the-middle Attacks

Shailesh Vaya

In secure multi-party computation $n$ parties jointly evaluate an $n$-variate function $f$ in the presence of an adversary which can corrupt up till $t$ parties. Almost all the works that have appeared in the literature so far assume the presence of authenticated channels between the parties. This assumption is far from realistic. Two directions of research have been borne from relaxing this (strong) assumption: (a) The adversary is virtually omnipotent and can control all the communication channels in the network, (b) Only a partially connected topology of authenticated channels is guaranteed and adversary controls a subset of the communication channels in the network. This work introduces a new setting for (unconditional) secure multiparty computation problem which is an interesting intermediate model with respect to the above well studied models from the literature (by sharing a salient feature from both the above models). We consider the problem of (unconditional) secure multi-party computation when 'some' of the communication channels connecting the parties can be corrupted passively as well as actively. For this setting, some honest parties may be connected to several other honest parties via corrupted channels and may not be able to authentically communicate with them. Such parties may not be assured the canonical guarantees of correctness or privacy. We present refined definitions of security for this new intermediate model of unconditional multiparty computation. We show how to adapt protocols for (Unconditional) secure multiparty computation to realize the definitions and also argue the tightness of the results achieved by us.

arXiv:1005.5020•May 27, 2010•0 citations

A Note on the Relation between the Definitions of Security for Semi-Honest and Malicious Adversaries.

Carmit Hazay, Yehuda Lindell

In secure computation, a set of parties wish to jointly compute some function of their private inputs while preserving security properties like privacy, correctness and more. The two main adversary models that have been considered are semi-honest adversaries who follow the prescribed protocol but try to glean more information than allowed from the protocol transcript, and malicious adversaries who can run any efficient strategy in order to carry out their attack. As such they can deviate at will from the prescribed protocol. One would naturally expect that any protocol that is secure in the presence of malicious adversaries will automatically be secure in the presence of semi-honest adversaries. However, due to a technicality in the definition, this is not necessarily true. In this brief note, we explain why this is the case, and show that a slight modification to the definition of semi-honest adversaries (specifically, allowing a semi-honest adversary to change its received input) suffices for fixing this anomaly. Our aim in publishing this note is to make this curious fact more known to the wider cryptographic community. 1 Malicious Versus Semi-honest Adversaries

•Jan 1, 2010•12 citations
Security analysis of multiparty cryptographic protocols distinguishes between two types of adversarial settings: In the non-adaptive setting, the set of corrupted parties is chosen in advance, before the interaction begins. In the adaptive setting, the adversary chooses who to corrupt during the course of the computation. We study the relations between adaptive security (i.e., security in the adaptive setting) and non-adaptive security, according to two definitions and in several models of computation. While affirming some prevailing beliefs, we also obtain some unexpected results. Some highlights of our results are: . According to the definition of Dodis-Micali-Rogaway (which is set in the information-theoretic model), adaptive and non-adaptive security are equivalent. This holds for both honest-but-curious and Byzantine adversaries, and for any number of parties. . According to the definition of Canetti, for honest-but-curious adversaries, adaptive security is equivalent to...
We present general definitions of security for multi-party cryptographic protocols, with focus on the task of evaluating a probabilistic function of the parties' inputs. We show that, with respect to these definitions, security is preserved under a natural composition operation. The definitions follow the general paradigm of known definitions; yet some substantial modifications and simplifications are introduced. The composition operation is the natural `subroutine substitution' operation, formalized by Micali and Rogaway. We consider several standard settings for multi-party protocols, including the cases of eavesdropping, Byzantine, non-adaptive and adaptive adversaries, as well as the information-theoretic and the computational models. In particular, in the computational model we provide the first definition of security of protocols that is shown to be preserved under composition.
In the setting of multiparty computation a set of parties with private inputs wish to compute some joint function of their inputs, whilst preserving certain security properties (like privacy and correctness). An adaptively secure protocol is one in which the security properties are preserved even if an adversary can adaptively and dynamically corrupt parties during a computation. This provides a high level of security, that is arguably necessary in today’s world of active computer break-ins. Until now, the work on adaptively secure multiparty computation has focused almost exclusively on the setting of an honest majority, and very few works have considered the honest minority and two-party cases. In addition, significant computational and communication costs are incurred by most protocols that achieve adaptive security. In this work, we consider the two-party setting and assume that honest parties may erase data. We show that in this model it is possible to securely compute any two-party functionality in the presence of adaptive semi-honest adversaries. Furthermore, our protocol remains secure under concurrent general composition (meaning that it remains secure irrespective of the other protocols running together with it). Our protocol is based on Yao’s garbled-circuit construction and, importantly, is as efficient as the analogous protocol for static corruptions. We argue that the model of adaptive corruptions with erasures has been unjustifiably neglected and that it deserves much more attention. 1
Secure multi-party computation (MPC) enables distrustful parties to jointly perform computations while guaranteeing both the privacy of their inputs and the correctness of the computation. This thesis explores two aspects of secure multi-party computation: adaptive security and round efficiency. Adaptive security is concerned with an adversary that adaptively determines who and when to corrupt during the course of the computation. Even though this is a very natural and realistic assumption about the adversary, most of the MPC literature addresses security only against a static adversary — an adversary that chooses (and fixes) which parties to corrupt before the protocol starts executing. A protocol is called round-efficient if it runs in a small number of rounds. Constructing such protocols is important since efficiency of a protocol is greatly influenced by its round complexity. The security in this thesis is formulated in the universal composability (UC) framework introduced by Canetti [Can01]. Protocols secure in the UC framework remain secure even when executed concurrently with other arbitrary protocols running in some larger network, and can be used as subroutines of larger protocols in a modular fashion. This property is important considering that nowadays many protocols are executed concurrently with others in the Internet. With the focus on adaptive security and round efficiency, we obtain the following results: (1) We show that with access to an ideal commitment functionality, there exists a protocol that UC realizes any well-formed multi-party functionality against a malicious, adaptive adversary that may corrupt any number of parties, with black-box access to any protocol that UC realizes oblivious transfer against a semi-honest, adaptive adversary. (2) We show that there exists a protocol that UC realizes oblivious transfer against a semi-honest, adaptive adversary, with black-box access to a cryptographic primitive called a trapdoor simulatable cryptosystem, which is a natural relaxation of a simulatable cryptosystem introduced by Damgard and Nielsen [3N00]. We also show that the primitive can be constructed based on hardness of factoring. (3) We present a single-message protocol that UC realizes two-party computing with encrypted data (a variant of secure two-party computation), based on the DDH assumption and non- interactive zero-knowledge arguments. The protocol achieves security against a malicious, static adversary. (4) We present two round-efficient protocols that UC realize multi-party computing with encrypted data (a variant of secure multi-party computation), based on the DDH assumption and non-interactive zero-knowledge arguments. The first (resp. second) protocol requires one round (resp. two rounds) with appropriate preprocessing, which is independent of the exact circuit and actual inputs of the specific instance problem to solve — only the bound on the circuit size is known. Although the first protocol is more round-efficient, the preprocessing of the second is sometimes better under some efficiency considerations. Both protocols achieve security against a malicious, static adversary that may corrupt up to all but one parties.
In secure multi-party computation nnn parties jointly evaluate an nnn-variate function fff in the presence of an adversary which can corrupt up till ttt parties. Almost all the works that have appeared in the literature so far assume the presence of authenticated channels between the parties. This assumption is far from realistic. Two directions of research have been borne from relaxing this (strong) assumption: (a) The adversary is virtually omnipotent and can control all the communication channels in the network, (b) Only a partially connected topology of authenticated channels is guaranteed and adversary controls a subset of the communication channels in the network. This work introduces a new setting for (unconditional) secure multiparty computation problem which is an interesting intermediate model with respect to the above well studied models from the literature (by sharing a salient feature from both the above models). We consider the problem of (unconditional) secure multi-party computation when 'some' of the communication channels connecting the parties can be corrupted passively as well as actively. For this setting, some honest parties may be connected to several other honest parties via corrupted channels and may not be able to authentically communicate with them. Such parties may not be assured the canonical guarantees of correctness or privacy. We present refined definitions of security for this new intermediate model of unconditional multiparty computation. We show how to adapt protocols for (Unconditional) secure multiparty computation to realize the definitions and also argue the tightness of the results achieved by us.
In secure computation, a set of parties wish to jointly compute some function of their private inputs while preserving security properties like privacy, correctness and more. The two main adversary models that have been considered are semi-honest adversaries who follow the prescribed protocol but try to glean more information than allowed from the protocol transcript, and malicious adversaries who can run any efficient strategy in order to carry out their attack. As such they can deviate at will from the prescribed protocol. One would naturally expect that any protocol that is secure in the presence of malicious adversaries will automatically be secure in the presence of semi-honest adversaries. However, due to a technicality in the definition, this is not necessarily true. In this brief note, we explain why this is the case, and show that a slight modification to the definition of semi-honest adversaries (specifically, allowing a semi-honest adversary to change its received input) suffices for fixing this anomaly. Our aim in publishing this note is to make this curious fact more known to the wider cryptographic community. 1 Malicious Versus Semi-honest Adversaries