Optimal Coding for Streaming Authentication and Interactive Communication

  • Matthew Franklin
  • Ran Gelles
  • Rafail Ostrovsky
  • Leonard J. Schulman
Part of the Lecture Notes in Computer Science book series (LNCS, volume 8043)

Abstract

Error correction and message authentication are well studied in the literature, and various efficient solutions have been suggested and analyzed. This is however not the case for data streams in which the message is very long, possibly infinite, and not known in advance to the sender. Trivial solutions for error-correcting and authenticating data streams either suffer from a long delay at the receiver’s end or cannot perform well when the communication channel is noisy.

In this work we suggest a constant-rate error-correction scheme and an efficient authentication scheme for data streams over a noisy channel (one-way communication, no feedback) in the shared-randomness model. Our first scheme does not assume shared randomness and (non-efficiently) recovers a (1 − 2c)-fraction prefix of the stream sent so far, assuming the noise level is at most c < 1/2. The length of the recovered prefix is tight.

To be able to overcome the c = 1/2 barrier we relax the model and assume the parties pre-share a secret key. Under this assumption we show that for any given noise rate c < 1, there exists a scheme that correctly decodes a (1 − c)-fraction of the stream sent so far with high probability, and moreover, the scheme is efficient. Furthermore, if the noise rate exceeds c, the scheme aborts with high probability. We also show that no constant-rate authentication scheme recovers more than a (1 − c)-fraction of the stream sent so far with non-negligible probability, thus the relation between the noise rate and recoverable fraction of the stream is tight, and our scheme is optimal.

Our techniques also apply to the task of interactive communication (two-way communication) over a noisy channel. In a recent paper, Braverman and Rao [STOC 2011] show that any function of two inputs has a constant-rate interactive protocol for two users that withstands a noise rate up to 1/4. By assuming that the parties share a secret random string, we extend this result and construct an interactive protocol that succeeds with overwhelming probability against noise rates up to 1/2. We also show that no constant-rate protocol exists for noise rates above 1/2 for functions that require two-way communication. This is contrasted with our first result in which computing the “function” requires only one-way communication and the noise rate can go up to 1.

Keywords

data stream private codes adversarial noise authentication tree codes interactive communication 

References

  1. 1.
    Bonsall, C.: The case of the hungry stranger. HarperCollins (1963)Google Scholar
  2. 2.
    Brakerski, Z., Kalai, Y.T.: Efficient interactive coding against adversarial noise. In: IEEE Annual Symposium on Foundations of Computer Science, pp. 160–166 (2012)Google Scholar
  3. 3.
    Brakerski, Z., Naor, M.: Fast algorithms for interactive coding. In: Proceedings of the 24th Annual ACM-SIAM Symposium on Discrete Algorithms, SODA 2013, pp. 443–456 (2013)Google Scholar
  4. 4.
    Braverman, M.: Towards deterministic tree code constructions. In: Proceedings of the 3rd Innovations in Theoretical Computer Science Conference, pp. 161–167. ACM (2012)Google Scholar
  5. 5.
    Braverman, M., Rao, A.: Towards coding for maximum errors in interactive communication. In: Proceedings of the 43rd Annual ACM Symposium on Theory of Computing, STOC 2011, pp. 159–166. ACM, New York (2011)Google Scholar
  6. 6.
    Diffie, W., Hellman, M.: New directions in cryptography. IEEE Transactions on Information Theory 22(6), 644–654 (1976)MathSciNetCrossRefMATHGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Even, S., Goldreich, O., Micali, S.: On-line/Off-line digital signatures. In: Brassard, G. (ed.) CRYPTO 1989. LNCS, vol. 435, pp. 263–275. Springer, Heidelberg (1990)Google Scholar
  8. 8.
    Franklin, M., Gelles, R., Ostrovsky, R., Schulman, L.J.: Optimal coding for streaming authentication and interactive communication. In: Electronic Colloquium on Computational Complexity (ECCC) (2012), http://eccc.hpi-web.de/report/2012/104
  9. 9.
    Gelles, R., Moitra, A., Sahai, A.: Efficient and explicit coding for interactive communication. In: IEEE Annual Symposium on Foundations of Computer Science, pp. 768–777 (2011)Google Scholar
  10. 10.
    Gennaro, R., Rohatgi, P.: How to sign digital streams. In: Kaliski Jr., B.S. (ed.) CRYPTO 1997. LNCS, vol. 1294, pp. 180–197. Springer, Heidelberg (1997)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Goldreich, O.: Foundations of cryptography. Basic applications, vol. II. Cambridge University Press, New York (2004)CrossRefMATHGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Golle, P., Modadugu, N.: Authenticating streamed data in the presence of random packet loss. In: ISOC Network and Distributed System Security Symposium, NDSS 2001 (2001)Google Scholar
  13. 13.
    Guruswami, V., Smith, A.: Codes for computationally simple channels: Explicit constructions with optimal rate. In: IEEE Annual Symposium on Foundations of Computer Science, pp. 723–732 (2010)Google Scholar
  14. 14.
    Hemenway, B., Ostrovsky, R.: Public-key locally-decodable codes. In: Wagner, D. (ed.) CRYPTO 2008. LNCS, vol. 5157, pp. 126–143. Springer, Heidelberg (2008)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Hemenway, B., Ostrovsky, R., Strauss, M.J., Wootters, M.: Public key locally decodable codes with short keys. In: Goldberg, L.A., Jansen, K., Ravi, R., Rolim, J.D.P. (eds.) RANDOM 2011 and APPROX 2011. LNCS, vol. 6845, pp. 605–615. Springer, Heidelberg (2011)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Langberg, M.: Private codes or succinct random codes that are (almost) perfect. In: Proceedings of the 45th Annual IEEE Symposium on Foundations of Computer Science, FOCS 2004, pp. 325–334. IEEE Computer Society, Washington, DC (2004)Google Scholar
  17. 17.
    Lipton, R.: A new approach to information theory. In: Enjalbert, P., Mayr, E.W., Wagner, K.W. (eds.) STACS 1994. LNCS, vol. 775, pp. 699–708. Springer, Heidelberg (1994)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
    Micali, S., Peikert, C., Sudan, M., Wilson, D.A.: Optimal error correction against computationally bounded noise. In: Kilian, J. (ed.) TCC 2005. LNCS, vol. 3378, pp. 1–16. Springer, Heidelberg (2005)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. 19.
    Miner, S., Staddon, J.: Graph-based authentication of digital streams. In: IEEE Symposium on Security and Privacy, pp. 232–246 (2001)Google Scholar
  20. 20.
    Peczarski, M.: An improvement of the tree code construction. Information Processing Letters 99(3), 92–95 (2006)MathSciNetCrossRefMATHGoogle Scholar
  21. 21.
    Perrig, A., Canetti, R., Tygar, J., Song, D.: Efficient authentication and signing of multicast streams over lossy channels. In: IEEE Symposium on Security and Privacy, pp. 56–73 (2000)Google Scholar
  22. 22.
    Schulman, L.J.: Communication on noisy channels: a coding theorem for computation. In: Annual IEEE Symposium on Foundations of Computer Science, pp. 724–733 (1992)Google Scholar
  23. 23.
    Schulman, L.J.: Deterministic coding for interactive communication. In: STOC 1993: Proceedings of the Twenty-Fifth Annual ACM Symposium on Theory of Computing, pp. 747–756. ACM, New York (1993)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. 24.
    Schulman, L.J.: Coding for interactive communication. IEEE Transactions on Information Theory 42(6), 1745–1756 (1996)MathSciNetCrossRefMATHGoogle Scholar
  25. 25.
    Shannon, C.E.: A note on a partial ordering for communication channels. Information and Control 1(4), 390–397 (1958)MathSciNetCrossRefMATHGoogle Scholar
  26. 26.
    Smith, A.: Scrambling adversarial errors using few random bits, optimal information reconciliation, and better private codes. In: Proceedings of the Eighteenth Annual ACM-SIAM Symposium on Discrete Algorithms, SODA 2007, pp. 395–404. Society for Industrial and Applied Mathematics, Philadelphia (2007)Google Scholar

Copyright information

© International Association for Cryptologic Research 2013

Authors and Affiliations

  • Matthew Franklin
    • 1
  • Ran Gelles
    • 2
  • Rafail Ostrovsky
    • 2
    • 3
  • Leonard J. Schulman
    • 4
  1. 1.Department of Computer ScienceUniversity of CaliforniaDavisUSA
  2. 2.Department of Computer ScienceUniversity of CaliforniaLos AngelesUSA
  3. 3.Department of MathematicsUniversity of CaliforniaLos AngelesUSA
  4. 4.E&AS DivisionCaltechUSA

Personalised recommendations