Concurrently Secure Computation in Constant Rounds

  • Sanjam Garg
  • Vipul Goyal
  • Abhishek Jain
  • Amit Sahai
Part of the Lecture Notes in Computer Science book series (LNCS, volume 7237)

Abstract

We study the problem of constructing concurrently secure computation protocols in the plain model, where no trust is required in any party or setup. While the well established UC framework for concurrent security is impossible to achieve in this setting, meaningful relaxed notions of concurrent security have been achieved.

The main contribution of our work is a new technique useful for designing protocols in the concurrent setting (in the plain model). The core of our technique is a new rewinding-based extraction procedure which only requires the protocol to have a constant number of rounds. We show two main applications of our technique.

We obtain the first concurrently secure computation protocol in the plain model with super-polynomial simulation (SPS) security that uses only a constant number of rounds and requires only standard assumptions. In contrast, the only previously known result (Canetti et al., FOCS’10) achieving SPS security based on standard assumptions requires polynomial number of rounds. Our second contribution is a new definition of input indistinguishable computation (IIC) and a constant round protocols satisfying that definition. Our definition of input indistinguishable computation is a simplification and strengthening of the definition of Micali et al. (FOCS’06) in various directions. Most notably, our definition provides meaningful security guarantees even for randomized functionalities.

Keywords

Secure Computation Random String Commitment Scheme Oblivious Transfer Main Thread 
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.

References

  1. 1.
    Barak, B., Canetti, R., Nielsen, J., Pass, R.: Universally composable protocols with relaxed set-up assumptions. In: FOCS, pp. 186–195 (2004)Google Scholar
  2. 2.
    Barak, B.: Constant-round coin-tossing with a man in the middle or realizing the shared random string model. In: FOCS, pp. 345–355 (2002)Google Scholar
  3. 3.
    Barak, B., Canetti, R., Lindell, Y., Pass, R., Rabin, T.: Secure Computation Without Authentication. In: Shoup, V. (ed.) CRYPTO 2005. LNCS, vol. 3621, pp. 361–377. Springer, Heidelberg (2005)Google Scholar
  4. 4.
    Barak, B., Prabhakaran, M., Sahai, A.: Concurrent non-malleable zero knowledge. In: FOCS, pp. 345–354 (2006)Google Scholar
  5. 5.
    Barak, B., Sahai, A.: How to play almost any mental game over the net - concurrent composition via super-polynomial simulation. In: FOCS, pp. 543–552. IEEE Computer Society (2005)Google Scholar
  6. 6.
    Ben-David, A., Nisan, N., Pinkas, B.: Fairplaymp: a system for secure multi-party computation. In: ACM Conference on Computer and Communications Security, pp. 257–266 (2008)Google Scholar
  7. 7.
    Blum, M.: How to prove a theorem so no one else can claim it. In: International Congress of Mathematicians, pp. 1444–1451 (1987)Google Scholar
  8. 8.
    Canetti, R., Kushilevitz, E., Lindell, Y.: On the limitations of universally composable two-party computation without set-up assumptions. J. Cryptology 19(2), 135–167 (2006)MathSciNetMATHCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Canetti, R., Lindell, Y., Ostrovsky, R., Sahai, A.: Universally composable two-party and multi-party secure computation. In: STOC, pp. 494–503 (2002)Google Scholar
  10. 10.
    Canetti, R.: Universally composable security: A new paradigm for cryptographic protocols. In: FOCS, pp. 136–145 (2001)Google Scholar
  11. 11.
    Canetti, R., Fischlin, M.: Universally Composable Commitments. In: Kilian, J. (ed.) CRYPTO 2001. LNCS, vol. 2139, pp. 19–40. Springer, Heidelberg (2001)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Canetti, R., Kilian, J., Petrank, E., Rosen, A.: Black-box concurrent zero-knowledge requires \(\stackrel{\sim}{\Omega}(\log n)\) rounds. In: STOC, pp. 570–579 (2001)Google Scholar
  13. 13.
    Canetti, R., Lin, H., Pass, R.: Adaptive hardness and composable security in the plain model from standard assumptions. In: FOCS, pp. 541–550 (2010)Google Scholar
  14. 14.
    Canetti, R., Pass, R., Shelat, A.: Cryptography from sunspots: How to use an imperfect reference string. In: FOCS, pp. 249–259 (2007)Google Scholar
  15. 15.
    Chandran, N., Goyal, V., Sahai, A.: New Constructions for UC Secure Computation Using Tamper-Proof Hardware. In: Smart, N.P. (ed.) EUROCRYPT 2008. LNCS, vol. 4965, pp. 545–562. Springer, Heidelberg (2008)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Damgård, I., Pedersen, T.P., Pfitzmann, B.: On the existence of statistically hiding bit commitment schemes and fail-stop signatures. J. Cryptology 10(3), 163–194 (1997)MathSciNetMATHCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    Dolev, D., Dwork, C., Naor, M.: Nonmalleable cryptography. SIAM J. Comput. 30(2), 391–437 (2000)MathSciNetMATHCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
    Garg, S., Goyal, V., Jain, A., Sahai, A.: Bringing People of Different Beliefs Together to Do UC. In: Ishai, Y. (ed.) TCC 2011. LNCS, vol. 6597, pp. 311–328. Springer, Heidelberg (2011)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. 19.
    Goldreich, O., Micali, S., Wigderson, A.: How to play any mental game. In: STOC 1987: Proceedings of the 19th Annual ACM Conference on Theory of Computing, pp. 218–229. ACM Press, New York (1987)Google Scholar
  20. 20.
    Goldreich, O.: Foundation of Cryptography - Basic Tools. Cambridge University Press (2001)Google Scholar
  21. 21.
    Goldwasser, S., Micali, S., Rackoff, C.: The knowledge complexity of interactive proof systems. SIAM J. Comput. 18(1), 186–208 (1989)MathSciNetMATHCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. 22.
    Goyal, V.: Constant round non-malleable protocols using one-way functions. In: STOC (2011)Google Scholar
  23. 23.
    Goyal, V., Jain, A., Ostrovsky, R.: Password-Authenticated Session-Key Generation on the Internet in the Plain Model. In: Rabin, T. (ed.) CRYPTO 2010. LNCS, vol. 6223, pp. 277–294. Springer, Heidelberg (2010)Google Scholar
  24. 24.
    Goyal, V., Katz, J.: Universally Composable Multi-party Computation with an Unreliable Common Reference String. In: Canetti, R. (ed.) TCC 2008. LNCS, vol. 4948, pp. 142–154. Springer, Heidelberg (2008)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. 25.
    Goyal, V., Sahai, A.: Resettably Secure Computation. In: Joux, A. (ed.) EUROCRYPT 2009. LNCS, vol. 5479, pp. 54–71. Springer, Heidelberg (2009)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. 26.
    Groth, J., Ostrovsky, R.: Cryptography in the Multi-string Model. In: Menezes, A. (ed.) CRYPTO 2007. LNCS, vol. 4622, pp. 323–341. Springer, Heidelberg (2007)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. 27.
    Halevi, S., Micali, S.: Practical and Provably-Secure Commitment Schemes from Collision-Free Hashing. In: Koblitz, N. (ed.) CRYPTO 1996. LNCS, vol. 1109, pp. 201–215. Springer, Heidelberg (1996)Google Scholar
  28. 28.
    Katz, J.: Universally Composable Multi-party Computation Using Tamper-Proof Hardware. In: Naor, M. (ed.) EUROCRYPT 2007. LNCS, vol. 4515, pp. 115–128. Springer, Heidelberg (2007)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. 29.
    Kilian, J.: Founding cryptography on oblivious transfer. In: STOC, pp. 20–31 (1988)Google Scholar
  30. 30.
    Kilian, J., Petrank, E.: Concurrent and resettable zero-knowledge in poly-loalgorithm rounds. In: STOC, pp. 560–569 (2001)Google Scholar
  31. 31.
    Lin, H., Pass, R.: Non-malleability amplification. In: STOC, pp. 189–198 (2009)Google Scholar
  32. 32.
    Lin, H., Pass, R.: Constant-round non-malleable commitments from any one-way function. In: STOC (2011)Google Scholar
  33. 33.
    Lin, H., Pass, R., Tseng, W.-L.D., Venkitasubramaniam, M.: Concurrent Non-Malleable Zero Knowledge Proofs. In: Rabin, T. (ed.) CRYPTO 2010. LNCS, vol. 6223, pp. 429–446. Springer, Heidelberg (2010)Google Scholar
  34. 34.
    Lin, H., Pass, R., Venkitasubramaniam, M.: A unified framework for concurrent security: universal composability from stand-alone non-malleability. In: STOC, pp. 179–188 (2009)Google Scholar
  35. 35.
    Lindell, Y.: Lower Bounds for Concurrent Self Composition. In: Naor, M. (ed.) TCC 2004. LNCS, vol. 2951, pp. 203–222. Springer, Heidelberg (2004)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  36. 36.
    Malkhi, D., Nisan, N., Pinkas, B., Sella, Y.: Fairplay - secure two-party computation system. In: USENIX Security Symposium, pp. 287–302 (2004)Google Scholar
  37. 37.
    Micali, S., Pass, R., Rosen, A.: Input-indistinguishable computation. In: FOCS, pp. 367–378. IEEE Computer Society (2006)Google Scholar
  38. 38.
    Naor, M.: Bit commitment using pseudorandomness. J. Cryptology 4(2), 151–158 (1991)MATHCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  39. 39.
    Naor, M., Yung, M.: Universal one-way hash functions and their cryptographic applications. In: STOC, pp. 33–43 (1989)Google Scholar
  40. 40.
    Pass, R.: Simulation in Quasi-Polynomial Time, and its Application to Protocol Composition. In: Biham, E. (ed.) EUROCRYPT 2003. LNCS, vol. 2656, pp. 160–176. Springer, Heidelberg (2003)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  41. 41.
    Pass, R.: Personal Communication (2011)Google Scholar
  42. 42.
    Pass, R., Rosen, A.: Concurrent non-malleable commitments. In: FOCS, pp. 563–572 (2005)Google Scholar
  43. 43.
    Pass, R., Rosen, A.: New and improved constructions of non-malleable cryptographic protocols. In: STOC, pp. 533–542 (2005)Google Scholar
  44. 44.
    Prabhakaran, M., Rosen, A., Sahai, A.: Concurrent zero knowledge with logarithmic round-complexity. In: FOCS, pp. 366–375 (2002)Google Scholar
  45. 45.
    Prabhakaran, M., Sahai, A.: New notions of security: achieving universal composability without trusted setup. In: STOC, pp. 242–251 (2004)Google Scholar
  46. 46.
    Richardson, R., Kilian, J.: On the Concurrent Composition of Zero-Knowledge Proofs. In: Stern, J. (ed.) EUROCRYPT 1999. LNCS, vol. 1592, pp. 415–431. Springer, Heidelberg (1999)Google Scholar
  47. 47.
    Rosen, A.: A Note on Constant-Round Zero-Knowledge Proofs for NP. In: Naor, M. (ed.) TCC 2004. LNCS, vol. 2951, pp. 191–202. Springer, Heidelberg (2004)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  48. 48.
    Wee, H.: Black-box, round-efficient secure computation via non-malleability amplification. In: FOCS, pp. 531–540 (2010)Google Scholar
  49. 49.
    Yao, A.C.C.: How to generate and exchange secrets (extended abstract). In: FOCS, pp. 162–167. IEEE (1986)Google Scholar

Copyright information

© International Association for Cryptologic Research 2012

Authors and Affiliations

  • Sanjam Garg
    • 1
  • Vipul Goyal
    • 2
  • Abhishek Jain
    • 1
  • Amit Sahai
    • 1
  1. 1.UCLAUSA
  2. 2.MSRIndia

Personalised recommendations