22.04.2014 Views

a590003

a590003

a590003

SHOW MORE
SHOW LESS

You also want an ePaper? Increase the reach of your titles

YUMPU automatically turns print PDFs into web optimized ePapers that Google loves.

s ′<br />

Net’<br />

r ′ A<br />

r ′ H<br />

s ArA<br />

G A<br />

Net<br />

Graph<br />

rH<br />

s H G H<br />

G H<br />

G A<br />

p H<br />

r A<br />

s A<br />

G A G A<br />

s ′<br />

Sim<br />

p<br />

r ′ A<br />

p A<br />

p H<br />

Player[H]<br />

VSS<br />

Figure 21: Security of the VSS protocol when the dealer is dishonest.<br />

Finally, it is easy to see that p(h) = p h for all h ∈ H. Namely, if there exists C ⊆ [n]<br />

with clique C (G) = ⊤, then r h [h ′ ] = g h ′(h) = ˜f(h, h ′ ) for all h ′ ∈ C ∩ H, and therefore o h =<br />

interpolate C (r h ) = interpolate C∩H (r h ) = f(h, ·), and thus p h = o h (0) = ˜f(h, 0) = p(h).<br />

We therefore conclude that the real system is equivalent to (Sim| VSS) where Sim is the<br />

simulator defined by the following equations:<br />

Sim(s ′ , G A , s A , p A ) = (r<br />

A ′ , r A, G A , p):<br />

r a ′ = s ′ [a] (a ∈ A)<br />

r a [h] = g h (a) (h ∈ H, a ∈ A)<br />

r a [a ′ ] = s a ′[a] (a, a ′ ∈ A)<br />

G[h, h ′ ] = eq(g h ′(h), h h (h ′ )) (h, h ′ ∈ H)<br />

G[h, a] = eq(s a [h], h h (a)) (a ∈ A, h ∈ H)<br />

G[a,<br />

∨<br />

j] = G a [j]<br />

(a ∈ A, j ∈ [n])<br />

˜f = clique C (G) ∧ interpolate2 C (s ′ )<br />

C⊆[n]<br />

|C|≥n−t<br />

p = ˜f(·, 0)<br />

5 Conclusions<br />

Recognizing the inherent hardness of delivering security proofs for complex cryptographic protocols<br />

that are both precise and intuitive within existing security frameworks, we have presented a new<br />

framework to study the security of multi-party computations based on equational descriptions<br />

of interactive processes. Our framework allows a simple and intuitive, yet completely formal,<br />

description of interactive processes via sets of equations, and its foundations rely on tools from<br />

programming-language theory and domain theory. Beyond its simplicity, our framework completely<br />

avoids explicit addressing of non-determinism within cryptographic security proofs, making security<br />

proofs a matter of simple equational manipulations over precise mathematical structures. As a<br />

case study, we have presented simple security analyses of (variants of) two classical asynchronous<br />

protocols within our framework, Bracha’s broadcast protocol [8] and the Ben-Or, Canetti, Goldreich<br />

VSS protocol [5].<br />

We are convinced that our work will open up the avenue to several directions for future work.<br />

First off, while the results in this paper are presented for the special case of perfect security, a natural<br />

next step is to extend the framework to statistical and even computational security. Moreover, while<br />

the expressiveness of our framework (i.e., the monotonicity restrictions on protocols) remains to<br />

be thoroughly investigated, most distributed protocols we examined so far, seemed to admit a<br />

representation within our framework, possibly after minor modifications which often resulted in a<br />

27<br />

12. An Equational Approach to Secure Multi-party Computation

Hooray! Your file is uploaded and ready to be published.

Saved successfully!

Ooh no, something went wrong!