We show efficient, practical (server-aided) secure two-party computation protocols ensuring privacy, correctness and fairness in the presence of malicious (Byzantine) faults. Our requirements from the server are modest. To ensure privacy and correctness, we only assume trusted execution service, executing an initialization program provided by both parties. To further ensure fairness, we further assume a trusted-decryption service, providing decryption service using known public key. Both of these trusted services are feasible in practice, and may be useful for additional tasks; both can also be distributed, with linear overhead, for redundancy. Formally, we model them as ideal functionalities, allowing proof of security using the hybrid model. Our fairness-ensuring protocol is optimistic, i.e., the decryption service is invoked only in case of faults. We believe that the protocols are sufficiently efficient, to allow deployment, in particular for financial applications.
We show efficient, practical (server-aided) secure two-party computation protocols ensuring privacy, correctness and fairness in the presence of malicious (Byzantine) faults. Our requirements from the server are modest. To ensure privacy and correctness, we only assume trusted execution service, executing an initialization program provided by both parties. To further ensure fairness, we further assume a trusted-decryption service, providing decryption service using known public key. Both of these trusted services are feasible in practice, and may be useful for additional tasks; both can also be distributed, with linear overhead, for redundancy. Formally, we model them as ideal functionalities, allowing proof of security using the hybrid model. Our fairness-ensuring protocol is optimistic, i.e., the decryption service is invoked only in case of faults. We believe that the protocols are sufficiently efficient, to allow deployment, in particular for financial applications.
We show efficient, practical (server-aided) securetwo-party computation protocols ensuring privacy, correctnessand fairness in the presence of malicious (Byzantine) faults. Ourrequirements from the server are modest: to ensure privacyand correctness, we only assume offline set-up prior to protocolexecution; and to also ensure fairness, we further assume atrusted-decryption service, providing decryption service usingknown public key. The fairness-ensuring protocol is optimistic, i.e., the decryption service is invoked only in case of faults. Bothassumptions are feasible in practice and formally presented inthe hybrid model. The resulting protocols may be sufficientlyefficient, to allow deployment, in particular for financial appli-cations.
We introduce secure guaranteed two-party computation, where parties commit in advance to compute a function over their private inputs, by providing some (validated) compensation, such that if a party fails to provide an appropriate input during protocol execution, then the peer receives the compensation. Enforcement of the guarantees requires a trusted enforcement authority (TEA); however, the protocol protects con dentiality even from the TEA. Our secure guaranteed computation protocol is optimistic, i.e., the TEA is involved only if a party fails to participate (correctly). Secure guaranteed computation has direct practical applications, such as sensitive trading of nancial products, and could also be used as a building block to motivate parties to complete protocols, e.g., ensuring unbiased coin tossing. The guarantee process can be either symmetric (both parties provide guarantees) or asymmetric (e.g., only server provides guarantee to client). Symmetric guarantees should also be fair, i.e., one party cannot obtain guarantee of the other party without supplying a guarantee as well. The protocol guaranteeing output, which we present uses in a modular manner a new protocol, that we construct, for optimistic fair secure computation, which may be of independent interest, as it is simpler and more e cient than previously known protocols.
Abstract. We present an efficient and fair protocol for secure two-party computation in the optimistic model, where a partially trusted third party T is available, but not involved in normal protocol executions. T is needed only if communication is disrupted or if one of the two parties misbehaves. The protocol guarantees that although one party may terminate the protocol at any time, the computation remains fair for the other party. Communication is over an asynchronous network. All our protocols are based on efficient proofs of knowledge and involve no general zero-knowledge tools. As intermediate steps we describe efficient verifiable oblivious transfer and verifiable secure function evaluation protocols, whose security is proved under the decisional Diffie-Hellman assumption. 1
Effective multi-party computation protocols have been developed, but concerns regarding privacy and correctness persist. Classic results demonstrate that guaranteed output delivery can be achieved by assuming fairness and identifiable abort. However, if the majority is malicious, it is still challenging to design an efficient implementation that can deliver correct outputs while maintaining robustness and fairness. To address this issue, we have redesigned the secret-sharing mechanism and employed a semi-trusted third party (TTP) as the key manager to provide optimistic backup for output delivery. The verification and delivery procedures prevent the malicious parties from “stealing” the output, when there is at least one honest party. Furthermore, the TTP has no knowledge of output, so even if he is malicious and colluding, we only lose fairness. The decryption is needed only when misconduct is detected. Our scheme also enables identified abort for offline preprocessing, and the audit of the offline sub-protocols can be publicly performed, holding corrupted parties accountable before receiving private inputs. With fairness and identifiable abort, output delivery is guaranteed by excluding the cheaters.
Consider several parties that do not trust each other, yet they wish to correctly compute some common function of their local inputs while keeping these inputs private. This problem is known as "Secure Multi-Party Computation", and was introduced by Andrew Yao in 1982. Secure multi-party computations have some real world examples like electronic auctions, electronic voting or fingerprinting. In this thesis we consider the case where there are only two parties involved. This is known as "Secure Two-Party Computation". If there is a trusted third party called Carol, then the problem is pretty straightforward. The participating parties could hand their inputs in Carol who can compute the common function correctly and could return the outputs to the corresponding parties. The goal is to achieve (almost) the same result when there is no trusted third party. Cryptographic protocols are designed in order to solve these kinds of problems. These protocols are analyzed within an appropriate model in which the behavior of parties is structured. The basic level is called the Semi-Honest Model where parties are assumed to follow the protocol specification, but later can derive additional information based on the messages which have been received so far. A more realistic model is the so-called Malicious Model. The common approach is to first analyze a protocol in the semi-honest model and then later extend it into the malicious model. Any cryptographic protocol for secure two-party computation must satisfy the following security requirements: correctness, privacy and fairness. It must guarantee the correctness of the result while preserving the privacy of the parties’ inputs, even if one of the parties is malicious and behaves arbitrarily throughout the protocol. It must also guarantee fairness. This roughly means that whenever a party aborts the protocol prematurely, he or she should not have any advantage over the other party in discovering the output. The main question for researchers is to construct new protocols that achieve the above mentioned goals for secure multi-party computation. Of course, such protocols must be secure in a given model, as well as be as efficient as possible. In 1986, Yao presented the first general protocol for secure two-party computation which was applicable only to the semi-honest model. He uses a tool called "Garbled Circuit". Yao’s protocol uses the underlying primitives ("Pseudorandom Generator" and "Oblivious Transfer") as blackboxes which lead to efficient results. After Yao’s work many variants and improvements have been proposed for the malicious model. In this thesis, we design several new protocols for secure two-party computation based on Yao’s garbled circuit. Before we present the details of our new designs, we first show several weaknesses, security flaws or problems with the existing protocols in the literature. We first work in the semi-honest model and then extend it into the malicious model by presenting new protocols. Finally we add fairness to our protocol. Oblivious transfer (OT) is a fundamental primitive in modern cryptography which is useful for implementing protocols for secure multi-party computation. We study several variants of oblivious transfer in this thesis. We present a new protocol for the so-called "Committed OT". This protocol is very efficient in the sense that it is quite good in comparison to the most efficient committed OT protocols in the literature. The abovementioned flaw with the use of OT can be fixed with our committed oblivious transfer protocol. Furthermore, it is more general than all previous protocols, and, therefore, it is of independent interest. We also deal with fairness in this thesis. For protocols based on garbled circuit, so far only Benny Pinkas has presented a protocol in the literature for achieving fairness. We show a subtle problem with this protocol where the privacy of the inputs of one party can be compromised. We also describe this problem in detail which is in fact related to the fairness, and finally propose a more efficient scheme that does achieve fairness.
Abstract. Secure protocols for complicated tasks are usually constructed in two phases. Initially, one designs a protocol that is secure in a semihonest model. Second, zero-knowledge correctness proofs are added to assure correctness and privacy against malicious adversaries. Often the corresponding communication and computational overhead makes this approach intractable in practice. Therefore, we define an intermediate notion of security—consistency. In a consistent protocol, participants always learn if their opponent cheats but cannot complain without violating their own privacy. Thus, a potential victim has to choose between the utility of the correct output and a potential privacy breach. In many contexts, where the long-term reputation of a service provider is more important than the privacy of an individual query, such security notion provides adequate protection with a minimal overhead. Private inference control and adaptive oblivious transfer are the most straightforward examples of such protocols.