Abstract. In the setting of secure computation, a set of parties wish to securely compute some function of their inputs, in the presence of an adversary. The adversary in question may be static (meaning that it con-trols a predetermined subset of the parties) or adaptive (meaning that it can choose to corrupt parties during the protocol execution and based on what it sees). In this paper, we study two fundamental questions relating to the basic zero-knowledge and oblivious transfer protocol problems: – Adaptive zero-knowledge proofs: We ask whether it is possible to con-struct adaptive zero-knowledge proofs (with unconditional sound-ness). Beaver (STOC 1996) showed that known zero-knowledge proofs are not adaptively secure, and in addition showed how to construct zero-knowledge arguments (with computational soundness). – Adaptively secure oblivious transfer: All known protocols for adap-tively secure oblivious transfer rely on seemingly stronger hardness assumptions than for the case of static adversaries. We ask whether this is inherent, and in particular, whether it is possible to construct adaptively secure oblivious transfer from enhanced trapdoor permu-tations alone. We provide surprising answers to the above questions, showing that achieving adaptive security is sometimes harder than achieving static se-curity, and sometimes not. First, we show that assuming the existence of one-way functions only, there exist adaptive zero-knowledge proofs for all languages in NP. In order to prove this, we overcome the problem that all adaptive zero-knowledge protocols known until now used equivocal commitments (which would enable an all-powerful prover to cheat). Sec-ond, we prove a black-box separation between adaptively secure oblivious transfer and enhanced trapdoor permutations. As a corollary, we derive a black-box separation between adaptively and statically securely obliv-ious transfer. This is the first black-box separation to relate to adaptive security and thus the first evidence that it is indeed harder to achieve security in the presence of adaptive adversaries than in the presence of static adversaries. 1
Abstract. In the setting of secure computation, a set of parties wish to securely compute some function of their inputs, in the presence of an adversary. The adversary in question may be static (meaning that it con-trols a predetermined subset of the parties) or adaptive (meaning that it can choose to corrupt parties during the protocol execution and based on what it sees). In this paper, we study two fundamental questions relating to the basic zero-knowledge and oblivious transfer protocol problems: – Adaptive zero-knowledge proofs: We ask whether it is possible to con-struct adaptive zero-knowledge proofs (with unconditional sound-ness). Beaver (STOC 1996) showed that known zero-knowledge proofs are not adaptively secure, and in addition showed how to construct zero-knowledge arguments (with computational soundness). – Adaptively secure oblivious transfer: All known protocols for adap-tively secure oblivious transfer rely on seemingly stronger hardness assumptions than for the case of static adversaries. We ask whether this is inherent, and in particular, whether it is possible to construct adaptively secure oblivious transfer from enhanced trapdoor permu-tations alone. We provide surprising answers to the above questions, showing that achieving adaptive security is sometimes harder than achieving static se-curity, and sometimes not. First, we show that assuming the existence of one-way functions only, there exist adaptive zero-knowledge proofs for all languages in NP. In order to prove this, we overcome the problem that all adaptive zero-knowledge protocols known until now used equivocal commitments (which would enable an all-powerful prover to cheat). Sec-ond, we prove a black-box separation between adaptively secure oblivious transfer and enhanced trapdoor permutations. As a corollary, we derive a black-box separation between adaptively and statically securely obliv-ious transfer. This is the first black-box separation to relate to adaptive security and thus the first evidence that it is indeed harder to achieve security in the presence of adaptive adversaries than in the presence of static adversaries. 1
In this paper, we study the question of whether or not it is possible to construct protocols for general secure computation in the setting of malicious adversaries and no honest majority that use the underlying primitive (e.g., enhanced trapdoor permutation) in a black-box way only. Until now, all known general constructions for this setting were inherently non-blackbox since they required the parties to prove zero-knowledge statements that are related to the computation of the underlying primitive. Our main technical result is a fully black-box reduction from oblivious transfer with security against malicious parties to oblivious transfer with security against semi-honest parties. As a corollary, we obtain the first constructions of general multiparty protocols (with security against malicious adversaries and without an honest majority) which only make a black-box use of semi-honest oblivious transfer, or alternatively a black-box use of lower-level primitives such as enhanced trapdoor permutations or homomorphic encryption. In order to construct this reduction we introduce a new notion of security called privacy in the presence of defensible adversaries. This notion states that if an adversary can produce (retroactively, after the protocol terminates) an input and random tape that make
In this paper, we study the question of whether or not it is possible to construct protocols for general secure computation in the setting of malicious adversaries and no honest majority that use the underlying primitive (e.g., enhanced trapdoor permutation) in a black-box way only. Until now, all known general constructions for this setting were inherently non-black-box since they required the parties to prove zero-knowledge statements that are related to the computation of the underlying primitive. Our main technical result is a fully black-box reduction from oblivious transfer with security against malicious parties to oblivious transfer with security against semihonest parties. As a corollary, we obtain the first constructions of general multiparty protocols (with security against malicious adversaries and without an honest majority) which make only a black-box use of semihonest oblivious transfer, or alternatively a black-box use of lower-level primitives such as enhanced trapdoor permutations or homomorphic encryption. In order to construct this reduction we introduce a new notion of security called privacy in the presence of defensible adversaries. This notion states that if an adversary can produce (retroactively, after the protocol terminates) an input and random tape that make its actions appear to be honest, then it is guaranteed that it learned nothing more than its prescribed output. We then show how to construct defensible oblivious transfer from semihonest oblivious transfer, and malicious oblivious transfer from defensible oblivious transfer, all in a black-box way.
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.
We provide the first construction of a concurrent and non-malleable zero knowledge argument for every language in NP. We stress that our construction is in the plain model with no common random string, trusted parties, or super-polynomial simulation. That is, we construct a zero knowledge protocol Pi such that for every polynomial-time adversary that can adaptively and concurrently schedule polynomially many executions of Pi, and corrupt some of the verifiers and some of the provers in these sessions, there is a polynomial-time simulator that can simulate a transcript of the entire execution, along with the witnesses for all statements proven by a corrupt prover to an honest verifier Our security model is the traditional model for concurrent zero knowledge, where the statements to be proven by the honest provers are fixed in advance and do not depend on the previous history (but can be correlated with each other); corrupted provers, of course, can chose the statements adaptively. We also prove that there exists some functionality F (a combination of zero knowledge and oblivious transfer) such that it is impossible to obtain a concurrent non-malleable protocol for F in this model. Previous impossibility results for composable protocols ruled out existence of protocols for a wider class of functionalities {including zero knowledge!) but only if these protocols were required to remain secure when executed concurrently with arbitrarily chosen different protocols (Lindell, FOCS 2003) or if these protocols were required to remain secure when the honest parties' inputs in each execution are chosen adaptively based on the results of previous executions (Lindell, TCC2004). We obtain an Otilde(n) -round protocol under the assumption that one-to-one one-way functions exist. This can be improved to Otilde(k log n) rounds under the assumption that there exist k-round statistically hiding commitment schemes. Our protocol is a black-box zero knowledge protocol
Oblivious transfer is one of the most basic and important building blocks in cryptography. As such, understanding its cost is of prime importance. Beaver (STOC 1996) showed that it is possible to obtain poly(n) oblivious transfers given only n actual oblivious transfer calls and using one-way functions, where n is the security parameter. In addition, he showed that it is impossible to extend oblivious transfer information theoretically. The notion of extending oblivious transfer is important theoretically (to understand the complexity of computing this primitive) and practically (since oblivious transfers can be expensive and thus extending them using only one-way functions is very attractive). Despite its importance, very little is known about the feasibility of extending oblivious transfer, beyond the fact that it is impossible information theoretically. Specifically, it is not known whether or not one-way functions are actually necessary for extending oblivious transfer, whether or not it is possible to extend oblivious transfers with adaptive security, and whether or not it is possible to extend oblivious transfers when starting with just a few. In this paper, we address these questions and provide almost complete answers to all of them. We show that the existence of any oblivious transfer extension protocol with security for static semihonest adversaries implies one-way functions, that an oblivious transfer extension protocol with adaptive security implies oblivious transfer with static security, and that the existence of an oblivious transfer extension protocol from only O(log n) oblivious transfers implies oblivious transfer itself.
Two main goals of modern cryptography are to identify the minimal assumptions necessary to construct secure cryptographic primitives as well as to construct secure protocols in strong and realistic adversarial models. In this thesis, we address both of these fundamental questions. In the first part of this thesis, we present results on the black-box complexity of two basic cryptographic primitives: non-malleable encryption and optimally-fair coin tossing. Black-box reductions are reductions in which both the underlying primitive as well as the adversary are accessed only in an input-output (or black-box) manner. Most known cryptographic reductions are black-box. Moreover, black-box reductions are typically more efficient than non-black-box reductions. Thus, the black-box complexity of cryptographic primitives is a meaningful and important area of study which allows us to gain insight into the primitive. We study the black box complexity of non-malleable encryption and optimally-fair coin tossing, showing a positive result for the former and a negative one for the latter. Non-malleable encryption is a strong security notion for public-key encryption, guaranteeing that it is impossible to "maul" a ciphertext of a message m into a ciphertext of a related message. This security guarantee is essential for many applications such as auctions. We show how to transform, in a black-box manner, any public-key encryption scheme satisfying a weak form of security, semantic security, to a scheme satisfying non-malleability. Coin tossing is perhaps the most basic cryptographic primitive, allowing two distrustful parties to flip a coin whose outcome is 0 or 1 with probability 1/2. A fair coin tossing protocol is one in which the outputted bit is unbiased, even in the case where one of the parties may abort early. However, in the setting where parties may abort early, there is always a strategy for one of the parties to impose bias of Omega(1/r) in an r-round protocol. Thus, achieving bias of O(1/r) in r rounds is optimal, and it was recently shown that optimally-fair coin tossing can be achieved via a black-box reduction to oblivious transfer. We show that it cannot be achieved via a black-box reduction to one-way function, unless the number of rounds is at least Omega(n/log n), where n is the input/output length of the one-way function. In the second part of this thesis, we present protocols for multiparty computation (MPC) in the Universal Composability (UC) model that are secure against malicious, adaptive adversaries. In the standard model, security is only guaranteed in a stand-alone setting; however, nothing is guaranteed when multiple protocols are arbitrarily composed. In contrast, the UC model, introduced by (Canetti, 2000), considers the execution of an unbounded number of concurrent protocols, in an arbitrary, and adversarially controlled network environment. Another drawback of the standard model is that the adversary must decide which parties to corrupt before the execution of the protocol commences. A more realistic model allows the adversary to adaptively choose which parties to corrupt based on its evolving view during the protocol. In our work we consider the the adaptive UC model, which combines these two security requirements by allowing both arbitrary composition of protocols and adaptive corruption of parties. In our first result, we introduce an improved, efficient construction of non-committing encryption (NCE) with optimal round complexity, from a weaker primitive we introduce called trapdoor-simulatable public key encryption (PKE). NCE is a basic primitive necessary to construct protocols secure under adaptive corruptions and in particular, is used to construct oblivious transfer (OT) protocols secure against semi-honest, adaptive adversaries. Additionally, we show how to realize trapdoor-simulatable PKE from hardness of factoring Blum integers, thus achieving the first construction of NCE from hardness of factoring. In our second result, we present a compiler for transforming an OT protocol secure against a semi-honest, adaptive adversary into one that is secure against a malicious, adaptive adversary. Our compiler achieves security in the UC model, assuming access to an ideal commitment functionality, and improves over previous work achieving the same security guarantee in two ways: it uses black-box access to the underlying protocol and achieves a constant multiplicative overhead in the round complexity. Combining our two results with the work of (Ishai et al., 2008), we obtain the first black-box construction of UC and adaptively secure MPC from trapdoor-simulatable PKE and the ideal commitment functionality.