ACM Asia Conference on Computer and Communications Security (ASIA CCS)

Adversarial Level Agreements for Two-Party Protocols

Marilyn George, Seny Kamara

Published May 24, 2022• 4 citations

Abstract

Adversaries in cryptography have traditionally been modeled as either semi-honest or malicious. Over the years, however, several works have investigated the design of cryptographic protocols against rational adversaries. The most well-known example are covert adversaries in secure computation (Aumann & Lindell, TCC '07) which are adversaries that wish to deviate from the protocol but without being detected. Protocols secure against such covert adversaries guarantee that deviations are detected with probability at least - which is known as the deterrence factor.

DOI: 10.1145/3488932.3517385

Related papers

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, 201012 citations

Calling out Cheaters: Covert Security With Public Verifiability.

Gilad Asharov, Claudio Orlandi

We introduce the notion of covert security with public verifiability, building on the covert security model introduced by Aumann and Lindell (TCC 2007). Protocols that satisfy covert security guarantee that the honest parties involved in the protocol will notice any cheating attempt with some constant probability ɛ. The idea behind the model is that the fear of being caught cheating will be enough of a deterrent to prevent any cheating attempt. However, in the basic covert security model, the honest parties are not able to persuade any third party (say, a judge) that a cheating occurred. We propose (and formally define) an extension of the model where, when an honest party detects cheating, it also receives a certificate that can be published and used to persuade other parties, without revealing any information about the honest party’s input. In addition, malicious parties cannot create fake certificates in the attempt of framing innocents. Finally, we construct a secure two-party computation protocol for any functionality f that satisfies our definition, and our protocol is almost as efficient as the one of Aumann and Lindell. We believe that the fear of a public humiliation or even legal consequences vastly exceeds the

Jan 1, 20120 citations

A Framework for Constructing Fast MPC over Arithmetic Circuits with Malicious Adversaries and an Honest-Majority

Yehuda Lindell, Ariel Nof

Protocols for secure multiparty computation enable a set of parties to compute a function of their inputs without revealing anything but the output. The security properties of the protocol must be preserved in the presence of adversarial behavior. The two classic adversary models considered are semi-honest (where the adversary follows the protocol specification but tries to learn more than allowed by examining the protocol transcript) and malicious (where the adversary may follow any arbitrary attack strategy). Protocols for semi-honest adversaries are often far more efficient, but in many cases the security guarantees are not strong enough.

ACM SIGSAC Conference on Computer and Communications Security (CCS)Oct 27, 201796 citations

Multiparty Computation with Covert Security and Public Verifiability

Peter Schöll, Mark Simkin, Luisa Siniscalchi

Multiparty computation protocols (MPC) are said to be secure against covert adversaries if the honest parties are guaranteed to detect any misbehavior by the malicious parties with a constant probability. Protocols that, upon detecting a cheating attempt, additionally allow the honest parties to compute certificates, which enable third parties to be convinced of the malicious behavior of the accused parties, are called publicly verifiable. In this work, we make several contributions to the domain of MPC with security against covert adversaries. We identify a subtle flaw in a protocol of Goyal, Mohassel, and Smith (Eurocrypt 2008), meaning that their protocol does not allow to identify a cheating party, and show how to fix their original construction to obtain security against covert adversaries. We present generic compilers that transform arbitrary passively secure preprocessing protocols, i.e. protocols where the parties have no private inputs, into protocols that are secure against covert adversaries and publicly verifiable. Using our compiler, we construct the first efficient variants of the BMR and the SPDZ protocols that are secure and publicly verifiable against a covert adversary that corrupts all but one party, and also construct variants with covert security and identifiable abort. We observe that an existing impossibility result by Ishai, Ostrovsky, and Seyalioglu (TCC 2012) can be used to show that there exist certain functionalities that cannot be realized by parties, that have oracle-access to broadcast and arbitrary two-party functionalities, with information-theoretic security against a covert adversary.

Leibniz international proceedings in informaticsJan 1, 20225 citations

Covert two-party computation

Luis von Ahn, Nicholas Hopper, John C. Langford

We introduce covert two-party computation, a stronger notion of security than standard secure two-party computation. Like standard secure two-party computation, covert two-party computation allows Alice and Bob, with secret inputs xA and xB respectively, to compute a function f(xA,xB) without leaking any additional information about their inputs. In addition, covert two-party computation guarantees that even the existence of a computation is hidden from all protocol participants unless the value of the function mandates otherwise. This allows the construction of protocols that return f(xA,xB) only when it equals a certain value of interest (such as "Yes, we are romantically interested in each other") but for which neither party can determine whether the other even ran the protocol whenever f(xA,xB) is not a value of interest. Since existing techniques for secure function evaluation always reveal that both parties participate in the computation, covert computation requires the introduction of new techniques based on provably secure steganography. We introduce security definitions for covert two-party computation and show that this surprising notion can be achieved by a protocol given the Decisional Diffie-Hellman assumption in the "honest but curious" model. Using this protocol as a subroutine, we present another protocol which is fair and secure against malicious adversaries in the Random Oracle Model --- unlike most other protocols against malicious adversaries, this protocol does not rely on zero-knowledge proofs (or similar cut-and-choose techniques), because they inherently reveal that a computation took place. We remark that all our protocols are of comparable efficiency to protocols for standard secure two-party computation.

ACM Symposium on Theory of Computing (STOC)May 22, 200541 citations

Covert Security with Public Verifiability: Faster, Leaner, and Simpler.

Hong Cheng, Jonathan I. Katz, Vladimir Kolesnikov +2 more

The notion of covert security for secure two-party computation serves as a compromise between the traditional semi-honest and malicious security definitions. Roughly, covert security ensures that cheating behavior is detected by the honest party with reasonable probability (say, 1/2). It provides more realistic guarantees than semi-honest security with significantly less overhead than is required by malicious security.

Jan 1, 20180 citations