## CryptoDB

#### Publications

Year
Venue
Title
2023
PKC
A \emph{witness map} deterministically maps a witness $w$ of some NP statement $x$ into computationally sound proof that $x$ is true, with respect to a public common reference string (CRS). In other words, it is a deterministic, non-interactive, computationally sound proof system in the CRS model. A \emph{unique witness map} (UWM) ensures that for any fixed statement $x$, the witness map should output the same \emph{unique} proof for $x$, no matter what witness $w$ it is applied to. More generally a \emph{compact witness map} (CWM) can only output one of at most $2^\alpha$ proofs for any given statement $x$, where $\alpha$ is some compactness parameter. Such compact/unique witness maps were proposed recently by Chakraborty, Prabhakaran and Wichs (PKC '20) as a tool for building tamper-resilient signatures, who showed how to construct UWMs from indistinguishability obfuscation (iO). In this work, we study CWMs and UWMs as primitives of independent interest and present a number of interesting connections to various notions in cryptography. \begin{itemize} \item First, we show that UWMs lie somewhere between witness PRFs (Zhandry; TCC '16) and iO -- they imply the former and are implied by the latter. In particular, we show that a relaxation of UWMs to the designated verifier (dv-UWM)'' setting is \emph{equivalent} to witness PRFs. Moreover, we consider two flavors of such dv-UWMs, which correspond to two flavors of witness PRFs previously considered in the literature, and show that they are all in fact equivalent to each other in terms of feasibility. \item Next, we consider CWMs that are extremely compact, with $\alpha = O(\log \kappa)$, where $\kappa$ is the security parameter. We show that such CWMs imply \emph{pseudo-UWMs} where the witness map is allowed to be \emph{pseudo-deterministic} -- i.e., for every true statement $x$, there is a unique proof such that, on any witness $w$, the witness map outputs this proof with $1-1/p(\lambda)$ probability, for a polynomial $p$ that we can set arbitrarily large. \item Lastly, we consider CWMs that are mildly compact, with $\alpha = p(\lambda)$ for some a-priori fixed polynomial $p$, independent of the length of the statement $x$ or witness $w$. Such CWMs are implied by succinct non-interactive arguments (SNARGs). We show that such CWMs imply NIZKs, and therefore lie somewhere between NIZKs and SNARGs. \end{itemize}
2023
EUROCRYPT
Deniable Authentication is a highly desirable property for secure messaging protocols: it allows a sender Alice to authentically transmit messages to a designated receiver Bob in such a way that only Bob gets convinced that Alice indeed sent these messages. In particular, it guarantees that even if Bob tries to convince a (non-designated) party Judy that Alice sent some message, and even if Bob gives Judy his own secret key, Judy will not be convinced: as far as Judy knows, _Bob could be making it all up!_ In this paper we study Deniable Authentication in the setting where Judy can additionally obtain Alice's secret key. Informally, we want that knowledge of Alice's secret key does not help Judy in learning whether Alice sent any messages, even if Bob does not have Alice's secret key and even if Bob cooperates with Judy by giving her his own secret key. This stronger flavor of Deniable Authentication was not considered before and is particularly relevant for Off-The-Record Group Messaging as it gives users stronger deniability guarantees. Our main contribution is a scalable "MDRS-PKE" (Multi-Designated Receiver Signed Public Key Encryption) scheme---a technical formalization of Deniable Authentication that is particularly useful for secure messaging for its confidentiality guarantees---that provides this stronger deniability guarantee. At its core lie new MDVS (Multi-Designated Verifier Signature) and PKEBC (Public Key Encryption for Broadcast) scheme constructions: our MDVS is not only secure with respect to the new deniability notions, but it is also the first to be tightly secure under standard assumptions; our PKEBC---which is also of independent interest---is the first with ciphertext sizes and encryption and decryption times that grow only linearly in the number of receivers. This is a significant improvement upon the construction given by Maurer et al. (EUROCRYPT '22), where ciphertext sizes and encryption and decryption times are quadratic in the number of receivers.
2023
EUROCRYPT
In the setting of subversion, an adversary tampers with the machines of the honest parties thus leaking the honest parties' secrets through the protocol transcript. The work of Mironov and Stephens-Davidowitz (EUROCRYPT’15) introduced the idea of reverse firewalls (RF) to protect against tampering of honest parties' machines. All known constructions in the RF framework rely on the malleability of the underlying operations in order for the RF to rerandomize/sanitize the transcript. RFs are thus limited to protocols that offer some structure, and hence based on public-key operations. In this work, we initiate the study of efficient Multiparty Computation (MPC) protocols in the presence of tampering. In this regard, - We construct the first Oblivious Transfer (OT) extension protocol in the RF setting. We construct poly(k) maliciously-secure OTs using O(k) public key operations and O(1) inexpensive symmetric key operations, where k is the security parameter. - We construct the first Zero-knowledge protocol in the RF setting where each multiplication gate can be proven using O(1) symmetric key operations. We achieve this using our OT extension protocol and by extending the ZK protocol of Quicksilver (Yang, Sarkar, Weng and Wang, CCS'21) to the RF setting. - Along the way, we introduce new ideas for malleable interactive proofs that could be of independent interest. We define a notion of full malleability for Sigma protocols that unlike prior notions allow modifying the instance as well, in addition to the transcript. We construct new protocols that satisfy this notion, construct RFs for such protocols and use them in constructing our OT extension. The key idea of our work is to demonstrate that correlated randomness may be obtained in an RF friendly way without having to rerandomize the entire transcript. This enables us to avoid expensive public-key operations that grow with the circuit-size.
2022
EUROCRYPT
Subversion attacks undermine security of cryptographic protocols by replacing a legitimate honest party's implementation with one that leaks information in an undetectable manner. An important limitation of all currently known techniques for designing cryptographic protocols with security against subversion attacks is that they do not automatically guarantee security in the realistic setting where a protocol session may run concurrently with other protocols. We remedy this situation by providing a foundation of reverse firewalls (Mironov and Stephens-Davidowitz, EUROCRYPT'15) in the universal composability (UC) framework (Canetti, FOCS'01 and J. ACM'20). More in details, our contributions are threefold: - We generalize the UC framework to the setting where each party consists of a core (which has secret inputs and is in charge of generating protocol messages) and a firewall (which has no secrets and sanitizes the outgoing/incoming communication from/to the core). Both the core and the firewall can be subject to different flavors of corruption, modeling different kinds of subversion attacks. For instance, we capture the setting where a subverted core looks like the honest core to any efficient test, yet it may leak secret information via covert channels (which we call specious subversion). - We show how to sanitize UC commitments and UC coin tossing against specious subversion, under the DDH assumption. - We show how to sanitize the classical GMW compiler (Goldreich, Micali and Wigderson, STOC 1987) for turning MPC with security in the presence of semi-honest adversaries into MPC with security in the presence of malicious adversaries. This yields a completeness theorem for maliciously secure MPC in the presence of specious subversion. Additionally, all our sanitized protocols are transparent, in the sense that communicating with a sanitized core looks indistinguishable from communicating with an honest core. Thanks to the composition theorem, our methodology allows, for the first time, to design subversion-resilient protocols by sanitizing different sub-components in a modular way.
2022
EUROCRYPT
We put forth a new paradigm for program obfuscation, where obfuscated programs are endowed with proofs of well formedness.'' In addition to asserting existence of an underlying plaintext program with an attested structure, these proofs also prevent mauling attacks, whereby an adversary surreptitiously creates an obfuscated program based on secrets which are embedded in other obfuscated programs. We call this new guarantee Chosen Obfuscation Attacks (COA) security. We show how to enhance a large class of obfuscation mechanisms to be COA-secure, assuming subexponentially secure IO for circuits and subexponentially secure one-way functions.To demonstrate the power of the new notion, we also use it to realize: - A new form of software watermarking, which provides significantly broader protection than current schemes against counterfeits that pass a keyless, public verification process. - Completely CCA encryption, which is a strengthening of completely non-malleable encryption.
2021
ASIACRYPT
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 \textit{multi}-party computation protocol, and considering \textit{active} security in the presence of \textit{static} corruptions. In this paper, we initiate the study of RF for MPC in the \textit{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.
2021
TCC
Digital hardware Trojans are integrated circuits whose implementation differ from the specification in an arbitrary and malicious way. For example, the circuit can differ from its specified input/output behavior after some fixed number of queries (known as time bombs'') or on some particular input (known as cheat codes''). To detect such Trojans, countermeasures using multiparty computation (MPC) or verifiable computation (VC), have been proposed. On a high level, to realize a circuit with specification $\cF$ one has more sophisticated circuits $\cF^\diamond$ manufactured (where $\cF^\diamond$ specifies a MPC or VC of $\cF$), and then embeds these $\cF^\diamond$'s into a \emph{master circuit} which must be trusted but is relatively simple compared to $\cF$. Those solutions have a significant overhead as $\cF^\diamond$ is significantly more complex than $\cF$ and also the master circuits are not exactly trivial either. In this work, we show that in restricted settings, where $\cF$ has no evolving state and is queried on independent inputs, we can achieve a relaxed security notion using very simple constructions. In particular, we do not change the specification of the circuit at all (i.e., $\cF=\cF^\diamond$). Moreover the master circuit basically just queries a subset of its manufactured circuits and checks if they're all the same. The security we achieve guarantees that, if the manufactured circuits are initially tested on up to $T$ inputs, the master circuit will catch Trojans that try to deviate on significantly more than a $1/T$ fraction of the inputs. This bound is optimal for the type of construction considered, and we provably achieve it using a construction where $12$ instantiations of $\cF$ need to be embedded into the master. We also discuss an extremely simple construction with just $2$ instantiations for which we conjecture that it already achieves the optimal bound.
2020
PKC
We introduce the notion of Witness Maps as a cryptographic notion of a proof system. A Unique Witness Map (UWM) deterministically maps all witnesses for an $mathbf {NP}$ statement to a single representative witness, resulting in a computationally sound, deterministic-prover, non-interactive witness independent proof system. A relaxation of UWM, called Compact Witness Map (CWM), maps all the witnesses to a small number of witnesses, resulting in a “lossy” deterministic-prover, non-interactive proof-system. We also define a Dual Mode Witness Map (DMWM) which adds an “extractable” mode to a CWM. Our main construction is a DMWM for all $mathbf {NP}$ relations, assuming sub-exponentially secure indistinguishability obfuscation ( ${imathcal {O}}$ ), along with standard cryptographic assumptions. The DMWM construction relies on a CWM and a new primitive called Cumulative All-Lossy-But-One Trapdoor Functions (C-ALBO-TDF), both of which are in turn instantiated based on ${imathcal {O}}$ and other primitives. Our instantiation of a CWM is in fact a UWM; in turn, we show that a UWM implies Witness Encryption. Along the way to constructing UWM and C-ALBO-TDF, we also construct, from standard assumptions, Puncturable Digital Signatures and a new primitive called Cumulative Lossy Trapdoor Functions (C-LTDF). The former improves up on a construction of Bellare et al. (Eurocrypt 2016), who relied on sub-exponentially secure ${imathcal {O}}$ and sub-exponentially secure OWF. As an application of our constructions, we show how to use a DMWM to construct the first leakage and tamper-resilient signatures with a deterministic signer , thereby solving a decade old open problem posed by Katz and Vaikunthanathan (Asiacrypt 2009), by Boyle, Segev and Wichs (Eurocrypt 2011), as well as by Faonio and Venturi (Asiacrypt 2016). Our construction achieves the optimal leakage rate of $1 - o(1)$ .
2020
CRYPTO
Reverse firewalls were introduced at Eurocrypt 2015 by Miro-nov and Stephens-Davidowitz, as a method for protecting cryptographic protocols against attacks on the devices of the honest parties. In a nutshell: a reverse firewall is placed outside of a device and its goal is to sanitize'' the messages sent by it, in such a way that a malicious device cannot leak its secrets to the outside world. It is typically assumed that the cryptographic devices are attacked in a functionality-preserving way'' (i.e.~informally speaking, the functionality of the protocol remains unchanged under this attacks). In their paper, Mironov and Stephens-Davidowitz construct a protocol for passively-secure two-party computations with firewalls, leaving extension of this result to stronger models as an open question. In this paper, we address this problem by constructing a protocol for secure computation with firewalls that has two main advantages over the original protocol from Eurocrypt 2015. Firstly, it is a \emph{multi}party computation protocol (i.e.~it works for an arbitrary number $n$ of the parties, and not just for $2$). Secondly, it is secure in much stronger corruption settings, namely in the \emph{actively corruption model}. More precisely: we consider an adversary that can fully corrupt up to $n-1$ parties, while the remaining parties are corrupt in a functionality-preserving way. Our core techniques are: malleable commitments and malleable non-interactive zero-knowledge, which in particular allow us to create a novel protocol for multiparty augmented coin-tossing into the well with reverse firewalls (that is based on a protocol of Lindell from Crypto 2001).