Skip to main content
Log in

Rational secret sharing as extensive games

  • Research Paper
  • Published:
Science China Information Sciences Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

The threat that comes from previously used punishment strategies in rational secret sharing is weakened because the punishment somtimes also causes loss to the punisher himself. In this paper, we first model 2-out-of-2 rational secret sharing in an extensive game with imperfect information, and then provide a strategy for achieving secret recovery in this game. Moreover, we prove that the strategy is a sequential equilibrium which means after any history of the game no player can benefit from deviations so long as the other players stick to the strategy. In particular, when a deviation is detected, the punishment executed by the punisher is still his optimal option. Therefor, by considering rational secret sharing as an extensive game, we design punishment strategies that effectively punish the deviants and meanwhile guarantee punishers’ benefit. Hence, these punishments are more credible than previous ones. Except assuming the existence of simultaneous channels, our scheme can have dealer off-line and extend to the t-out-of-n setting, and also satisfies computational equilibria in some sense.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. Blakley G R. Safeguarding cryptographic keys. In: Proceedings of the National Computer Conference, American Federation of Information Processing Societies Proceedings. 1979, 48: 313–317

    Google Scholar 

  2. Shamir A. How to share a secret. Commun ACM, 1979, 22: 612–613

    Article  MathSciNet  MATH  Google Scholar 

  3. Halpern J, Teague V. Rational secret sharing and multiparty computation. In: Proceedings of the 36th STOC. New York: ACM Press, 2004. 623–632

    Google Scholar 

  4. Dodis Y, Rabin T. Cryptography and game theory. In: Nisan N, Roughgarden T, Tardos E, et al. eds. Algorithmic Game Theory. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2007. 181–207

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  5. Katz J. Bridging game theory and cryptography: Recent results and future directions. In: Proceedings of TCC 2008, LNCS 4948. Heidelberg: Springer, 2008. 251–272

    Google Scholar 

  6. Fudenberg D, Tirole J. Game Theory. Cambridge: MIT Press, 1992

    Google Scholar 

  7. Fuchsbauer G, Katz J, Naccache D. Efficient rational secret sharing in standard communication networks. In: Proceedings of TCC 2010, LNCS 5978. Heidelberg: Springer, 2010. 419–436

    Google Scholar 

  8. Gordon S D, Katz J. Rational secret sharing, revisited. In: Proceedings of SCN 2006, LNCS 4116. Heidelberg: Springer, 2006. 229–241

    Google Scholar 

  9. Kol G, Naor M. Games for exchanging information. In: Proceedings of STOC 2008. New York: ACM Press, 2008. 423–432

    Google Scholar 

  10. Maleka S, Shareef A, Pandu Rangan C. Rational secret sharing with repeated games. In: Proceedings of ISPEC 2008, LNCS 4991. Heidelberg: Springer, 2008. 334–346

    Google Scholar 

  11. Kol G, Naor M. Cryptography and game theory: Designing protocols for exchanging information. In: Proceedings of TCC 2008, LNCS 4948. Heidelberg: Springer, 2008. 320–339

    Google Scholar 

  12. Ong S J, Parkes D V, Rosen A, et al. Fairness with an honest minority and a rational majority. In: Proceedings of TCC 2009, LNCS 5444. Heidelberg: Springer, 2009. 36–53

    Google Scholar 

  13. Katz J. Ruminations on defining rational MPC. Talk given at SSoRC, Bertinoro, Italy, 2008. http://www.daimi.au.dk/jbn/SSoRC2008/program

  14. Gordon S D, Hazay C, Katz J, et al. Complete fairness in secure two-party computation. In: Proceedings of STOC 2008. New York: ACM Press, 2008. 413–422

    Google Scholar 

  15. Rabin T, Ben-Or M. Verifiable secret sharing and multiparty protocols with honest majority. In: Proceedings of the 21th Annual ACM Symposium on Theory of Computing (STOC). New York: ACM, 1989. 73–85

    Google Scholar 

  16. Wegman M, Carter L. New hash functions and their use in authentication and set equality. J Comput Syst Sci, 1981, 22: 265–279

    Article  MathSciNet  MATH  Google Scholar 

  17. Osborne M, Rubinstein A. A Course in Game Theory. Cambridge: MIT Press, 2004

    Google Scholar 

  18. Goldreich O. Foundations of Cryptography I: Basic Tools. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2001

    Book  Google Scholar 

  19. Abraham I, Dolev D, Gonen R, et al. Distributed computing meets game theory: robust mechanisms for rational secret sharing and multiparty computation. In: Proceedings of the 25th ACM Symposium Annual on Principles of Distributed Computing. New York: ACM Press, 2006. 53–62

    Google Scholar 

  20. Lysyanskaya A, Triandopoulos N. Rationality and adversarial behavior in multi-party computation. In: Proceedings of CRYPTO 2006, LNCS 4117. Heidelberg: Springer, 2006. 180–197

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Corresponding author

Correspondence to ZhiFang Zhang.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Zhang, Z., Liu, M. Rational secret sharing as extensive games. Sci. China Inf. Sci. 56, 1–13 (2013). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11432-011-4382-9

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11432-011-4382-9

Keywords

Navigation