Distributed Pseudorandom Functions for General Access Structures in NP

  • Bei Liang
  • Aikaterini Mitrokotsa
Conference paper
Part of the Lecture Notes in Computer Science book series (LNCS, volume 10631)


Distributed pseudorandom functions (DPRFs) originally introduced by Naor, Pinkas and Reingold (EUROCRYPT ’99) are pseudorandom functions (PRFs), whose computation is distributed to multiple servers. Although by distributing the function computation, we avoid single points of failures, this distribution usually implies the need for multiple interactions with the parties (servers) involved in the computation of the function. In this paper, we take distributed pseudorandom functions (DPRFs) even further, by pursuing a very natural direction. We ask if it is possible to construct distributed PRFs for a general class of access mechanism going beyond the threshold access structure and the access structure that can be described by a polynomial-size monotone span programs. More precisely, our contributions are two-fold and can be summarised as follows: (i) we introduce the notion of single round distributed PRFs for a general class of access structure (monotone functions in NP), (ii) we provide a provably secure general construction of distributed PRFs for every mNP access structure from puncturable PRFs based on indistinguishable obfuscation.


Distributed pseudorandom functions Puncturable PRFs Function secret sharing 



This work was partially supported by the People Programme (Marie Curie Actions) of the European Union’s Seventh Framework Programme (FP7/2007-2013) under REA grant agreement n 608743 and the STINT grant IB 2015-6001.


  1. 1.
    Boneh, D., Lewi, K., Montgomery, H., Raghunathan, A.: Key homomorphic PRFs and their applications. In: Canetti, R., Garay, J.A. (eds.) CRYPTO 2013, Part I. LNCS, vol. 8042, pp. 410–428. Springer, Heidelberg (2013). Scholar
  2. 2.
    De Santis, A., Desmedt, Y., Frankel, Y., Yung, M.: How to share a function securely. In: Proceedings of STOC 1994, pp. 522–533. ACM, New York (1994)Google Scholar
  3. 3.
    Desmedt, Y., Frankel, Y.: Threshold cryptosystems. In: Brassard, G. (ed.) CRYPTO 1989. LNCS, vol. 435, pp. 307–315. Springer, New York (1990). Scholar
  4. 4.
    Garg, S., Gentry, C., Halevi, S., Raykova, M., Sahai, A., Waters, B.: Candidate indistinguishability obfuscation and functional encryption for all circuits. In: Proceedings of FOCS 2013, Washington, D.C., USA, pp. 40–49. IEEE Computer Society (2013)Google Scholar
  5. 5.
    Grigni, M., Sipser, M.: Monotone complexity (1990)Google Scholar
  6. 6.
    Komargodski, I., Naor, M., Yogev, E.: Secret-sharing for NP. J. Cryptol. 30(2), 444–469 (2017)MathSciNetCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Naor, M., Pinkas, B., Reingold, O.: Distributed pseudo-random functions and KDCs. In: Stern, J. (ed.) EUROCRYPT 1999. LNCS, vol. 1592, pp. 327–346. Springer, Heidelberg (1999). Scholar
  8. 8.
    Naor, M., Reingold, O.: Number-theoretic constructions of efficient pseudo-random functions. J. ACM (JACM) 51(2), 231–262 (2004)MathSciNetCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Nielsen, J.B.: A threshold pseudorandom function construction and its applications. In: Yung, M. (ed.) CRYPTO 2002. LNCS, vol. 2442, pp. 401–416. Springer, Heidelberg (2002). Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer International Publishing AG, part of Springer Nature 2018

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Chalmers University of TechnologyGothenburgSweden

Personalised recommendations