Advertisement

Fast Verification of Any Remote Procedure Call: Short Witness-Indistinguishable One-Round Proofs for NP

  • William Aiello
  • Sandeep Bhatt
  • Rafail Ostrovsky
  • S. Raj. Rajagopalan
Conference paper
Part of the Lecture Notes in Computer Science book series (LNCS, volume 1853)

Abstract

Under a computational assumption, and assuming that both Prover and Verifier are computationally bounded, we show a one-round (i.e., Verifier speaks and then Prover answers) witness-indistinguishable interactive proof for NP with poly-logarithmic communication complexity. A major application of our main result is that we show how to check in an efficient manner and without any additional interaction the correctness of the output of any remote procedure call.

Keywords

Communication Complexity Oblivious Transfer Interactive Proof Remote Procedure Call Private Information Retrieval 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. 1.
    A. Ambainis. Upper bound on the communication complexity of private information retrieval. In Proc. of 24th ICALP, 1997.Google Scholar
  2. 2.
    S. Arora, C. Lund, R. Motwani, M. Sudan, and M. Szegedy. Proof verification and the hardness of approximation problems. Journal of the ACM, 45(3):501–555, May 1998.Google Scholar
  3. 3.
    L. Babai, L. Fortnow, L. Levin and M. Szegedy Checking computations in polylogarithmic time. In Proc. of the 23rd Annual ACM Symposium on the Theory of Computing, pp. 21–31, 1991.Google Scholar
  4. 4.
    I. Biehl and B. Meyer and S. Wetzel. Ensuring the Integrity of Agent-Based Computation by Short Proofs. Mobile Agents’ 98, Kurt Rothermel and Fritz Hohl, editors, Lecture Notes in Computer Science, Vol. 1477, 1998, Springer-Verlag, pp. 183–194.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    B. Chor, O. Goldreich, E. Kushilevitz, and M. Sudan. Private information retrieval. In Proc. of 36th FOCS, pages 41–50, 1995. Journal version to appear in JACM.Google Scholar
  6. 6.
    C. Cachin, S. Micali, and M. Stadler. Computationally private information retrieval with polylogarithmic communication. In Advances in Cryptology: Proceedings of EUROCRYPT99, 1999.Google Scholar
  7. 7.
    C. Dwork and M. Naor Zaps and Apps talk given at DIMACS Workshop on Cryptography and Intractability March 20–22, 2000 DIMACS Center, Rutgers University, Piscataway, NJ.Google Scholar
  8. 8.
    G. Di Crescenzo, Y. Ishai, and R. Ostrovsky. Universal service-providers for database private information retrieval. In Proc. of the 17th Annu. ACM Symp. on Principles of Distributed Computing, pages 91–100, 1998.Google Scholar
  9. 9.
    G. Di Crescenzo, T. Malkin, and R. Ostrovsky. Single-database private information retrieval implies oblivious transfer. In Advances in Cryptology-EUROCRYPT 2000, 2000.Google Scholar
  10. 10.
    U. Feige and J. Kilian, Two Prover Protocols: low error at affordable rates. In Proc of Annual ACM Symposium on the Theory of Computing, 1994 pp. 172–183.Google Scholar
  11. 11.
    U. Feige and A. Shamir, Witness Indistinguishable and Witness Hiding Protocols. In Proc. of Annual ACM Symposium on the Theory of Computing 1990, pages 416–426.Google Scholar
  12. 12.
    F. Ergün, S Kumar, and R. Rubinfeld. Fast pcps for approximations. FOCS 1999.Google Scholar
  13. 13.
    Y. Gertner, Y. Ishai, E. Kushilevitz, and T. Malkin Protecting data privacy in private information retrieval schemes. In Proc. of the 30th Annual ACM Symposium on the Theory of Computing, pp. 151–160, 1998.Google Scholar
  14. 14.
    J. Håstad. Some optimal inapproximability results. In Proceedings of the Twenty-Ninth Annual ACM Symposium on Theory of Computing, pages 1–10, El Paso, Texas, 4–6 May 1997.Google Scholar
  15. 15.
    J. Kilian Zero-Knowledge with Logspace Verifiers. In Proceedings of the Twenty-Fourth Annual ACM Symposium on Theory of Computing, pages 25–35, El Paso, Texas, 4–6 May 1997.Google Scholar
  16. 16.
    J. Kilian Improved Efficient Arguments In Proc. of CRYPTO Springer LNCS 963:311–324, 1995Google Scholar
  17. 17.
    J. Kilian, E. Petrank, and G. Tardos. Probabilistic Checkable Proofs with Zero Knowledge. In 29th ACM Symp. on Theory of Computation, May 1997.Google Scholar
  18. 18.
    E. Kushilevitz and R. Ostrovsky Replication is not needed: Single Database, computationally-private information retrieval. In Proc. of Thirty-Eight Foundations of Computer Science pp. 364–373, 1997.Google Scholar
  19. 19.
    E. Kushilevitz and R. Ostrovsky. One-way Trapdoor Permutations are Sufficient for Non-Trivial Single-Database Computationally-Private Information Retrieval. In Proc. of EUROCRYPT’ 00, 2000.Google Scholar
  20. 20.
    S. Micali. CS proofs (extended abstracts). In 35th Annual Symposium on Foundations of Computer Science, pages 436–453, Santa Fe, New Mexico, 20–22 1994. IEEE.Google Scholar
  21. 21.
    M. Naor and B. Pinkas, Oblivious transfer and polynomial evaluation. In Proceedings of the 31st Annual Symposium on Theory of Computing. ACM, pp. 33–43, 1999.Google Scholar
  22. 22.
    A. Polishchuk and D. Spielman Nearly-linear Size Holographic Proofs In Proceedings of the 25st Annual Symposium on Theory of Computing. ACM, pp. 194–203, 1994.Google Scholar
  23. 23.
    R. Raz A Parallel Repetition Theorem SIAM J. Computing Vol. 27, No. 3, pp. 763–803, June 1998.zbMATHCrossRefMathSciNetGoogle Scholar
  24. 24.
    B.S. Yee. A Sanctuary For Mobile Agents. Proceedings of the DARPA Workshop on Foundations for Secure Mobile Code. March, 1997.Google Scholar
  25. 25.
    A.C. Yao. Theory and Applications of Trapdoor Functions In 23rd Annual Symposium on Foundations of Computer Science pages 80–91, Chicago, Illinois, 3–5 November 1982. IEEE.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg 2000

Authors and Affiliations

  • William Aiello
    • 1
  • Sandeep Bhatt
    • 2
  • Rafail Ostrovsky
    • 3
  • S. Raj. Rajagopalan
    • 3
  1. 1.AT&T Labs-ResearchJapan
  2. 2.Akamai TechnologiesJapan
  3. 3.Telcordia TechnologiesJapan

Personalised recommendations