Comments on Harn–Lin’s cheating detection scheme
Detection of cheating and identification of cheaters in threshold schemes has been well studied, and several solid solutions have been provided in the literature. This paper analyses Harn and Lin’s recent work on cheating detection and identification of cheaters in Shamir’s threshold scheme. We will show that, in a broad area, Harn–Lin’s scheme fails to detect cheating and even if the cheating is detected cannot identify the cheaters. In particular, in a typical Shamir (t, n)-threshold scheme, where n = 2t − 1 and up to t − 1 of participants are corrupted, their scheme neither can detect nor can identify the cheaters. Moreover, for moderate size of groups their proposed cheaters identification scheme is not practical.
KeywordsThreshold secret sharing schemes Cheating detection Cheaters identification
Mathematics Subject Classification (2000)0804
- 1.Benaloh J.: Secret sharing homomorphisms: keeping shares of a secret secret. In: Odlyzko A. (ed.) Advances in Cryptology—Proceedings of CRYPTO’86. Lecture Notes in Computer Science, vol. 263, pp. 251–260. Springer-Verlag, Heidleberg (1987).Google Scholar
- 2.Blakley G.: Safeguarding cryptographic keys. In: Proceedings of AFIPS 1979 National Computer Conference, vol. 48, pp. 313–317 (1979).Google Scholar
- 4.Harn L., Lin C.: Detection and identification of cheaters in (t, n) secret sharing scheme. In: Designs, Codes and Cryptography, vol. 52, pp. 15–24 (2009).Google Scholar
- 6.Shamir A.: How to share a secret. Commun. ACM 22, 612–613 (November) (1979).Google Scholar