Abstract
We study Multi-party computation (MPC) in the setting of subversion, where the adversary tampers with the machines of honest parties. Our goal is to construct actively secure MPC protocols where parties are corrupted adaptively by an adversary (as in the standard adaptive security setting), and in addition, honest parties’ machines are compromised.
The idea of reverse firewalls (RF) was introduced at EUROCRYPT’15 by Mironov and Stephens-Davidowitz as an approach to protecting protocols against corruption of honest parties’ devices. Intuitively, an RF for a party \(\mathcal {P}\) is an external entity that sits between \(\mathcal {P}\) and the outside world and whose scope is to sanitize \(\mathcal {P}\)’s incoming and outgoing messages in the face of subversion of their computer. Mironov and Stephens-Davidowitz constructed a protocol for passively-secure two-party computation. At CRYPTO’20, Chakraborty, Dziembowski and Nielsen constructed a protocol for secure computation with firewalls that improved on this result, both by extending it to multi-party computation protocol, and considering active security in the presence of static corruptions.
In this paper, we initiate the study of RF for MPC in the adaptive setting. We put forward a definition for adaptively secure MPC in the reverse firewall setting, explore relationships among the security notions, and then construct reverse firewalls for MPC in this stronger setting of adaptive security. We also resolve the open question of Chakraborty, Dziembowski and Nielsen by removing the need for a trusted setup in constructing RF for MPC.
Towards this end, we construct reverse firewalls for adaptively secure augmented coin tossing and adaptively secure zero-knowledge protocols and obtain a constant round adaptively secure MPC protocol in the reverse firewall setting without setup. Along the way, we propose a new multi-party adaptively secure coin tossing protocol in the plain model, that is of independent interest.
S. Chakraborty—Received funding from the European Research Council (ERC) under the European Union’s Horizon 2020 research and innovation programme (682815 - TOCNeT).
P. Sarkar—Received funding from NSF grants 1931714, 1414119.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.
Access this chapter
Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout
Purchases are for personal use only
Notes
- 1.
The RF being corrupt is not interesting in the active setting, since the corrupt RF and the other party together can be thought of as the adversary.
- 2.
If we had a coin tossing protocol with black-box simulation, we could use it to transform a two round adaptively secure MPC protocol in the URS model [10] to a protocol in the plain model by generating the URS via the coin toss protocol.
- 3.
Looking ahead, in all our constructions the function \(\textsf {Transform}\) will typically be a very simple function like addition or field multiplication.
- 4.
Note that, if we were to give \(P_i\)’s internal state when it gets adaptively corrupt instead of the composed state, the adversary can trivially distinguish since the party’s state does not explain the sanitized transcript.
References
Abe, M., Fehr, S.: Perfect NIZK with adaptive soundness. In: Vadhan, S.P. (ed.) TCC 2007. LNCS, vol. 4392, pp. 118–136. Springer, Heidelberg (2007). https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-540-70936-7_7
Ateniese, G., Magri, B., Venturi, D.: Subversion-resilient signature schemes. In: Ray, I., Li, N., Kruegel, C. (eds.) ACM CCS 2015, pp. 364–375. ACM Press, October 2015
Auerbach, B., Bellare, M., Kiltz, E.: Public-key encryption resistant to parameter subversion and its realization from efficiently-embeddable groups. In: Abdalla, M., Dahab, R. (eds.) PKC 2018, Part I. LNCS, vol. 10769, pp. 348–377. Springer, Cham (2018). https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-76578-5_12
Ball, J., Borger, J., Greenwald, G., et al.: Revealed: how us and uk spy agencies defeat internet privacy and security. Know Your Neighborhood (2013)
Bellare, M., Fuchsbauer, G., Scafuro, A.: NIZKs with an untrusted crs: security in the face of parameter subversion. In: Cheon, J.H., Takagi, T. (eds.) ASIACRYPT 2016, Part II. LNCS, vol. 10032, pp. 777–804. Springer, Heidelberg (2016). https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-662-53890-6_26
Bellare, M., Jaeger, J., Kane, D.: Mass-surveillance without the state: Strongly undetectable algorithm-substitution attacks. In: Ray, I., Li, N., Kruegel, C. (eds.) ACM CCS 2015, pp. 1431–1440. ACM Press, October 2015
Bellare, M., Paterson, K.G., Rogaway, P.: Security of symmetric encryption against mass surveillance. In: Garay, J.A., Gennaro, R. (eds.) CRYPTO 2014, Part I. LNCS, vol. 8616, pp. 1–19. Springer, Heidelberg (2014). https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-662-44371-2_1
Bemmann, P., Chen, R., Jager, T.: Subversion-resilient public key encryption with practical watchdogs. In: Garay, J.A. (ed.) PKC 2021, Part I. LNCS, vol. 12710, pp. 627–658. Springer, Cham (2021). https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-75245-3_23
Benhamouda, F., Lin, H., Polychroniadou, A., Venkitasubramaniam, M.: Two-round adaptively secure multiparty computation from standard assumptions. In: Beimel, A., Dziembowski, S. (eds.) TCC 2018, Part I. LNCS, vol. 11239, pp. 175–205. Springer, Cham (2018). https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-03807-6_7
Canetti, R., Sarkar, P., Wang, X.: Efficient and round-optimal oblivious transfer and commitment with adaptive security. In: Moriai, S., Wang, H. (eds.) ASIACRYPT 2020, Part III. LNCS, vol. 12493, pp. 277–308. Springer, Cham (2020). https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-64840-4_10
Canetti, R., Sarkar, P., Wang, X.: Triply adaptive uc nizk. Cryptology ePrint Archive, Report 2020/1212 (2020). https://eprint.iacr.org/2020/1212
Chakraborty, S., Dziembowski, S., Nielsen, J.B.: Reverse firewalls for actively secure MPCs. In: Micciancio, D., Ristenpart, T. (eds.) CRYPTO 2020, Part II. LNCS, vol. 12171, pp. 732–762. Springer, Cham (2020). https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-56880-1_26
Chen, R., Huang, X., Yung, M.: Subvert KEM to Break DEM: practical algorithm-substitution attacks on public-key encryption. In: Moriai, S., Wang, H. (eds.) ASIACRYPT 2020, Part II. LNCS, vol. 12492, pp. 98–128. Springer, Cham (2020). https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-64834-3_4
Chen, R., Mu, Y., Yang, G., Susilo, W., Guo, F., Zhang, M.: Cryptographic reverse firewall via malleable smooth projective hash functions. In: Cheon, J.H., Takagi, T. (eds.) ASIACRYPT 2016, Part I. LNCS, vol. 10031, pp. 844–876. Springer, Heidelberg (2016). https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-662-53887-6_31
Choi, S.G., Dachman-Soled, D., Malkin, T., Wee, H.: Improved non-committing encryption with applications to adaptively secure protocols. In: Matsui, M. (ed.) ASIACRYPT 2009. LNCS, vol. 5912, pp. 287–302. Springer, Heidelberg (2009). https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-642-10366-7_17
Dauterman, E., Corrigan-Gibbs, H., Mazières, D., Boneh, D., Rizzo, D.: True2F: Backdoor-resistant authentication tokens. In: 2019 IEEE Symposium on Security and Privacy, pp. 398–416. IEEE Computer Society Press, May 2019
Degabriele, J.P., Farshim, P., Poettering, B.: A more cautious approach to security against mass surveillance. In: Leander, G. (ed.) FSE 2015. LNCS, vol. 9054, pp. 579–598. Springer, Heidelberg (2015). https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-662-48116-5_28
Degabriele, J.P., Paterson, K.G., Schuldt, J.C.N., Woodage, J.: Backdoors in pseudorandom number generators: possibility and impossibility results. In: Robshaw, M., Katz, J. (eds.) CRYPTO 2016 Part I. LNCS, vol. 9814, pp. 403–432. Springer, Heidelberg (2016). https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-662-53018-4_15
Dodis, Y., Ganesh, C., Golovnev, A., Juels, A., Ristenpart, T.: A formal treatment of backdoored pseudorandom generators. In: Oswald, E., Fischlin, M. (eds.) EUROCRYPT 2015, Part I. LNCS, vol. 9056, pp. 101–126. Springer, Heidelberg (2015). https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-662-46800-5_5
Dodis, Y., Mironov, I., Stephens-Davidowitz, N.: Message transmission with reverse firewalls—secure communication on corrupted machines. In: Robshaw, M., Katz, J. (eds.) CRYPTO 2016, Part I. LNCS, vol. 9814, pp. 341–372. Springer, Heidelberg (2016). https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-662-53018-4_13
Feige, U., Lapidot, D., Shamir, A.: Multiple noninteractive zero knowledge proofs under general assumptions. SIAM J. Comput. 29(1), 1–28 (1999)
Fischlin, M., Mazaheri, S.: Self-guarding cryptographic protocols against algorithm substitution attacks. In: 2018 IEEE 31st Computer Security Foundations Symposium (CSF), pp. 76–90. IEEE (2018)
Ganesh, C., Magri, B., Venturi, D.: Cryptographic reverse firewalls for interactive proof systems. In: Czumaj, A., Dawar, A., Merelli, E. (eds.) ICALP 2020, volume 168 of LIPIcs, pp. 55:1–55:16. Schloss Dagstuhl, July 2020
Garg, S., Sahai, A.: Adaptively secure multi-party computation with dishonest majority. In: Safavi-Naini, R., Canetti, R. (eds.) CRYPTO 2012. LNCS, vol. 7417, pp. 105–123. Springer, Heidelberg (2012). https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-642-32009-5_8
Gentry, C., Sahai, A., Waters, B.: Homomorphic encryption from learning with errors: conceptually-simpler, asymptotically-faster, attribute-based. In: Canetti, R., Garay, J.A. (eds.) CRYPTO 2013, Part I. LNCS, vol. 8042, pp. 75–92. Springer, Heidelberg (2013). https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-642-40041-4_5
Goldreich, O., Micali, S., Wigderson, A.: How to play any mental game or A completeness theorem for protocols with honest majority. In: Aho, A., (ed.) 19th ACM STOC, pp. 218–229. ACM Press, May 1987
Gorbunov, S., Vaikuntanathan, V., Wichs, D.: Leveled fully homomorphic signatures from standard lattices. In: Servedio, R.A., Rubinfeld, R. (eds.) 47th ACM STOC, pp. 469–477. ACM Press, June 2015
Mironov, I., Stephens-Davidowitz, N.: Cryptographic reverse firewalls. In: Oswald, E., Fischlin, M. (eds.) EUROCRYPT 2015, Part II. LNCS, vol. 9057, pp. 657–686. Springer, Heidelberg (2015). https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-662-46803-6_22
Russell, A., Tang, Q., Yung, M., Zhou, H.-S.: Cliptography: clipping the power of kleptographic attacks. In: Cheon, J.H., Takagi, T. (eds.) ASIACRYPT 2016, Part II. LNCS, vol. 10032, pp. 34–64. Springer, Heidelberg (2016). https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-662-53890-6_2
Russell, A., Tang, Q., Yung, M., Zhou, H.-S.: Generic semantic security against a kleptographic adversary. In: Thuraisingham, B.M., Evans, D., Malkin, T., Xu, D. (eds.) ACM CCS 2017, pp. 907–922. ACM Press, October 2017
Shumow, D., Ferguson, N.: On the possibility of a back door in the nist sp800-90 dual ec prng. In: Procedings Crypto, vol. 7 (2007)
Simmons, G.J.: Authentication theory/Coding theory. In: Blakley, G.R., Chaum, D. (eds.) CRYPTO 1984. LNCS, vol. 196, pp. 411–431. Springer, Heidelberg (1984). https://doi.org/10.1007/3-540-39568-7_32
Young, A., Yung, M.: The dark side of “Black-Box’’ cryptography or: should we trust capstone? In: Koblitz, N. (ed.) CRYPTO 1996. LNCS, vol. 1109, pp. 89–103. Springer, Heidelberg (1996). https://doi.org/10.1007/3-540-68697-5_8
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Editor information
Editors and Affiliations
Rights and permissions
Copyright information
© 2021 International Association for Cryptologic Research
About this paper
Cite this paper
Chakraborty, S., Ganesh, C., Pancholi, M., Sarkar, P. (2021). Reverse Firewalls for Adaptively Secure MPC Without Setup. In: Tibouchi, M., Wang, H. (eds) Advances in Cryptology – ASIACRYPT 2021. ASIACRYPT 2021. Lecture Notes in Computer Science(), vol 13091. Springer, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-92075-3_12
Download citation
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-92075-3_12
Published:
Publisher Name: Springer, Cham
Print ISBN: 978-3-030-92074-6
Online ISBN: 978-3-030-92075-3
eBook Packages: Computer ScienceComputer Science (R0)
