Cryptographic Combinatorial Securities Exchanges

  • Christopher Thorpe
  • David C. Parkes
Part of the Lecture Notes in Computer Science book series (LNCS, volume 5628)

Abstract

We present a useful new mechanism that facilitates the atomic exchange of many large baskets of securities in a combinatorial exchange. Cryptography prevents information about the securities in the baskets from being exploited, enhancing trust. Our exchange offers institutions who wish to trade large positions a new alternative to existing methods of block trading: they can reduce transaction costs by taking advantage of other institutions’ available liquidity, while third party liquidity providers guarantee execution—preserving their desired portfolio composition at all times. In our exchange, institutions submit encrypted orders which are crossed, leaving a “remainder”. The exchange proves facts about the portfolio risk of this remainder to third party liquidity providers without revealing the securities in the remainder, the knowledge of which could also be exploited. The third parties learn either (depending on the setting) the portfolio risk parameters of the remainder itself, or how their own portfolio risk would change if they were to incorporate the remainder into a portfolio they submit. In one setting, these third parties submit bids on the commission, and the winner supplies necessary liquidity for the entire exchange to clear. This guaranteed clearing, coupled with external price discovery from the primary markets for the securities, sidesteps difficult combinatorial optimization problems. This latter method of proving how taking on the remainder would change risk parameters of one’s own portfolio, without revealing the remainder’s contents or its own risk parameters, is a useful protocol of independent interest.

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. 1.
    Bossaerts, P., Fine, L., Ledyard, J.: Inducing liquidity in thin financial markets through combined-value trading mechanisms. European Economic Review 46(9), 1671–1695 (2002)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Boudot, F.: Efficient proofs that a committed number lies in an interval. In: Preneel, B. (ed.) EUROCRYPT 2000. LNCS, vol. 1807, pp. 431–444. Springer, Heidelberg (2000)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Bradford, P.G., Park, S., Rothkopf, M.H.: Protocol completion incentive problems in cryptographic Vickrey auctions. Technical Report RRR 3-2004, Rutgers Center for Operations Research, RUTCOR (2004)Google Scholar
  4. 4.
    Brandt, F., Sandholm, T.: (Im)possibility of unconditionally privacy-preserving auctions. In: Proc. 3rd Int. Conf. on Autonomous Agents and Multi-Agent Systems, pp. 810–817 (2004)Google Scholar
  5. 5.
    Damgård, I., Jurik, M.: A generalisation, a simplification and some applications of Paillier’s probabilistic public-key system. In: Proceedings of Public Key Cryptography 2001 (2001)Google Scholar
  6. 6.
    Di Crescenzo, G.: Privacy for the stock market. In: Syverson, P.F. (ed.) FC 2001. LNCS, vol. 2339, p. 259. Springer, Heidelberg (2002)Google Scholar
  7. 7.
    Fiat, A., Shamir, A.: How to prove yourself: Practical solutions to identification and signature problems. In: Odlyzko, A.M. (ed.) CRYPTO 1986. LNCS, vol. 263, pp. 186–194. Springer, Heidelberg (1987)Google Scholar
  8. 8.
    Johnson, J., Tabb, L.: Groping in the dark: Navigating crossing networks and other dark pools of liquidity, January 31 (2007)Google Scholar
  9. 9.
    Kiayias, A., Yung, M.: Efficient cryptographic protocols realizing e-markets with price discrimination. In: Financial Cryptography and Data Security, pp. 311–325 (2006)Google Scholar
  10. 10.
    Lepinski, M., Micali, S., Shelat, A.: Fair zero-knowledge. In: Proc. Theory of Cryptography Conference, pp. 245–263 (2005)Google Scholar
  11. 11.
    Paillier, P.: Public-key cryptosystems based on composite degree residuosity classes. In: Stern, J. (ed.) EUROCRYPT 1999. LNCS, vol. 1592, pp. 223–239. Springer, Heidelberg (1999)Google Scholar
  12. 12.
    Parkes, D.C., Cavallo, R., Elprin, N., Juda, A., Lahaie, S., Lubin, B., Michael, L., Shneidman, J., Sultan, H.: ICE: An iterative combinatorial exchange. In: ACM Conf. on Electronic Commerce, pp. 249–258 (2005)Google Scholar
  13. 13.
    Parkes, D.C., Kalagnanam, J.R., Eso, M.: Achieving budget-balance with Vickrey-based payment schemes in combinatorial exchanges. Technical report, IBM Research Report RC 22218 (2001)Google Scholar
  14. 14.
    Parkes, D.C., Rabin, M.O., Shieber, S.M., Thorpe, C.A.: Practical secrecy-preserving, verifiably correct and trustworthy auctions. In: ICEC 2006: Proceedings of the 8th international conference on Electronic commerce, pp. 70–81. ACM Press, New York (2006)Google Scholar
  15. 15.
    Parkes, D.C., Rabin, M.O., Shieber, S.M., Thorpe, C.A.: Practical secrecy-preserving, verifiably correct and trustworthy auctions. Electronic Commerce Research and Applications (to appear, 2008)Google Scholar
  16. 16.
    Rabin, M.O., Servedio, R.A., Thorpe, C.: Highly efficient secrecy-preserving proofs of correctness of computations and applications. In: Proc. IEEE Symposium on Logic in Computer Science (2007)Google Scholar
  17. 17.
    Rabin, M.O., Thorpe, C.: Time-lapse cryptography. Technical Report TR-22-06, Harvard University School of Engineering and Computer Science (2006)Google Scholar
  18. 18.
    Smith, S.W.: Trusted Computing Platforms: Design and Applications. Springer, New York (2005)MATHGoogle Scholar
  19. 19.
    Smith, T., Sandholm, T., Simmons, R.: Constructing and clearing combinatorial exchanges using preference elicitation. In: AAAI 2002 workshop on Preferences in AI and CP: Symbolic Approaches (2002)Google Scholar
  20. 20.
    Szydlo, M.: Risk assurance for hedge funds using zero knowledge proofs. In: S. Patrick, A., Yung, M. (eds.) FC 2005. LNCS, vol. 3570, pp. 156–171. Springer, Heidelberg (2005)Google Scholar
  21. 21.
    Thorpe, C., Parkes, D.C.: Cryptographic securities exchanges. In: Dietrich, S., Dhamija, R. (eds.) FC 2007 and USEC 2007. LNCS, vol. 4886, pp. 163–178. Springer, Heidelberg (2007)CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg 2009

Authors and Affiliations

  • Christopher Thorpe
    • 1
  • David C. Parkes
    • 1
  1. 1.School of Engineering and Applied SciencesHarvard University 

Personalised recommendations