Document Open Access Logo

Improved Trade-Offs Between Amortization and Download Bandwidth for Linear HSS

Authors Keller Blackwell , Mary Wootters

PDF

File

Thumbnail PDF
PDF
LIPIcs.ITC.2024.7.pdf
  • Filesize: 1.13 MB
  • 21 pages

Document Identifiers

Related Versions

Subject Classification

ACM Subject Classification
  • Theory of computation → Cryptographic primitives
  • Theory of computation → Error-correcting codes
Keywords
  • Error Correcting Codes
  • Homomorphic Secret Sharing

Metrics

  • Access Statistics
  • Total Accesses (updated on a weekly basis)
    0
    PDF Downloads
    0
    Metadata Views

Abstract

A Homomorphic Secret Sharing (HSS) scheme is a secret-sharing scheme that shares a secret x among s servers, and additionally allows an output client to reconstruct some function f(x) using information that can be locally computed by each server. A key parameter in HSS schemes is download rate, which quantifies how much information the output client needs to download from the servers. Often, download rate is improved by amortizing over 𝓁 instances of the problem, making 𝓁 also a key parameter of interest. 
Recent work [Fosli et al., 2022] established a limit on the download rate of linear HSS schemes for computing low-degree polynomials and constructed schemes that achieve this optimal download rate; their schemes required amortization over 𝓁 = Ω(s log(s)) instances of the problem. Subsequent work [Blackwell and Wootters, 2023] completely characterized linear HSS schemes that achieve optimal download rate in terms of a coding-theoretic notion termed optimal labelweight codes. A consequence of this characterization was that 𝓁 = Ω(s log(s)) is in fact necessary to achieve optimal download rate.
In this paper, we characterize all linear HSS schemes, showing that schemes of any download rate are equivalent to a generalization of optimal labelweight codes. This equivalence is constructive and provides a way to obtain an explicit linear HSS scheme from any linear code. Using this characterization, we present explicit linear HSS schemes with slightly sub-optimal rate but with much improved amortization 𝓁 = O(s). Our constructions are based on algebraic geometry codes (specifically Hermitian codes and Goppa codes).

Cite As Get BibTex

Keller Blackwell and Mary Wootters. Improved Trade-Offs Between Amortization and Download Bandwidth for Linear HSS. In 5th Conference on Information-Theoretic Cryptography (ITC 2024). Leibniz International Proceedings in Informatics (LIPIcs), Volume 304, pp. 7:1-7:21, Schloss Dagstuhl – Leibniz-Zentrum für Informatik (2024) https://doi.org/10.4230/LIPIcs.ITC.2024.7

Author Details

Keller Blackwell
  • Department of Computer Science, Stanford University, CA, USA
Mary Wootters
  • Departments of Computer Science and Electrical Engineering, Stanford University, CA, USA

Funding

  • Blackwell, Keller: KB is supported by a National Science Foundation Graduate Research Fellowship and by a graduate fellowship award from Knight-Hennessy Scholars at Stanford University. KB’s work is supported partially supported by NSF grant CCF-2231157.
  • Wootters, Mary: MW’s work was partially supported by NSF grants CCF-1844628, CCF-2133154, and CCF-2231157.

Acknowledgements

We thank the anonymous referees for helpful feedback.

References

  1. Donald Beaver and Joan Feigenbaum. Hiding instances in multioracle queries. In STACS 90, pages 37-48, 1990. Google Scholar
  2. Donald Beaver, Joan Feigenbaum, Joe Kilian, and Phillip Rogaway. Security with low communication overhead. In CRYPTO '90, pages 62-76, 1990. Google Scholar
  3. Michael Ben-Or, Shafi Goldwasser, and Avi Wigderson. Completeness theorems for non-cryptographic fault-tolerant distributed computation (extended abstract). In STOC, 1988. Google Scholar
  4. Josh Cohen Benaloh. Secret sharing homomorphisms: Keeping shares of A secret sharing. In Andrew M. Odlyzko, editor, CRYPTO '86, pages 251-260, 1986. Google Scholar
  5. Elwyn Berlekamp. Goppa codes. IEEE Transactions on Information Theory, 19(5):590-592, 1973. Google Scholar
  6. Keller Blackwell and Mary Wootters. A characterization of optimal-rate linear homomorphic secret sharing schemes, and applications. In 15th Innovations in Theoretical Computer Science Conference (ITCS 2024). Schloss Dagstuhl - Leibniz-Zentrum für Informatik, 2023. Google Scholar
  7. Keller Blackwell and Mary Wootters. Improved trade-offs between amortization and download bandwidth for linear hss. arXiv preprint arXiv:2403.08719, 2024. Google Scholar
  8. Elette Boyle, Geoffroy Couteau, Niv Gilboa, Yuval Ishai, Lisa Kohl, and Peter Scholl. Efficient pseudorandom correlation generators: Silent OT extension and more. In CRYPTO, pages 489-518, 2019. Google Scholar
  9. Elette Boyle, Geoffroy Couteau, Niv Gilboa, Yuval Ishai, and Michele Orrù. Homomorphic secret sharing: optimizations and applications. In Proceedings of the 2017 ACM SIGSAC Conference on Computer and Communications Security, pages 2105-2122, 2017. Google Scholar
  10. Elette Boyle, Niv Gilboa, and Yuval Ishai. Function secret sharing. In EUROCRYPT 2015, Part II, pages 337-367, 2015. Google Scholar
  11. Elette Boyle, Niv Gilboa, and Yuval Ishai. Breaking the circuit size barrier for secure computation under DDH. In Matthew Robshaw and Jonathan Katz, editors, Advances in Cryptology - CRYPTO 2016 - 36th Annual International Cryptology Conference, Santa Barbara, CA, USA, August 14-18, 2016, Proceedings, Part I, volume 9814 of Lecture Notes in Computer Science, pages 509-539. Springer, 2016. URL: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-662-53018-4_19.
  12. Elette Boyle, Niv Gilboa, and Yuval Ishai. Function secret sharing: Improvements and extensions. In Edgar R. Weippl, Stefan Katzenbeisser, Christopher Kruegel, Andrew C. Myers, and Shai Halevi, editors, Proceedings of the 2016 ACM SIGSAC Conference on Computer and Communications Security, Vienna, Austria, October 24-28, 2016, pages 1292-1303. ACM, 2016. URL: https://doi.org/10.1145/2976749.2978429.
  13. Elette Boyle, Niv Gilboa, Yuval Ishai, Huijia Lin, and Stefano Tessaro. Foundations of homomorphic secret sharing. In Anna R. Karlin, editor, 9th Innovations in Theoretical Computer Science Conference, ITCS 2018, January 11-14, 2018, Cambridge, MA, USA, volume 94 of LIPIcs, pages 21:1-21:21. Schloss Dagstuhl - Leibniz-Zentrum für Informatik, 2018. URL: https://doi.org/10.4230/LIPIcs.ITCS.2018.21.
  14. Elette Boyle, Lisa Kohl, and Peter Scholl. Homomorphic secret sharing from lattices without FHE. In EUROCRYPT 2019, Part II, pages 3-33, 2019. Google Scholar
  15. David Chaum, Claude Crépeau, and Ivan Damgård. Multiparty unconditionally secure protocols (extended abstract). In STOC, 1988. Google Scholar
  16. Benny Chor, Oded Goldreich, Eyal Kushilevitz, and Madhu Sudan. Private information retrieval. J. ACM, 1998. Google Scholar
  17. Geoffroy Couteau and Pierre Meyer. Breaking the circuit size barrier for secure computation under quasi-polynomial LPN. In EUROCRYPT 2021, Part II, pages 842-870, 2021. Google Scholar
  18. Ronald Cramer, Ivan Damgård, and Yuval Ishai. Share conversion, pseudorandom secret-sharing and applications to secure computation. In Joe Kilian, editor, Theory of Cryptography, Second Theory of Cryptography Conference, TCC 2005, Cambridge, MA, USA, February 10-12, 2005, Proceedings, volume 3378 of Lecture Notes in Computer Science, pages 342-362. Springer, 2005. URL: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-540-30576-7_19.
  19. Ronald Cramer, Ivan Damgård, and Ueli M. Maurer. General secure multi-party computation from any linear secret-sharing scheme. In EUROCRYPT, 2000. Google Scholar
  20. Quang Dao, Yuval Ishai, Aayush Jain, and Huijia Lin. Multi-party homomorphic secret sharing and sublinear mpc from sparse lpn. In Annual International Cryptology Conference, pages 315-348. Springer, 2023. Google Scholar
  21. Yevgeniy Dodis, Shai Halevi, Ron D. Rothblum, and Daniel Wichs. Spooky encryption and its applications. In Matthew Robshaw and Jonathan Katz, editors, Advances in Cryptology - CRYPTO 2016 - 36th Annual International Cryptology Conference, Santa Barbara, CA, USA, August 14-18, 2016, Proceedings, Part III, volume 9816 of Lecture Notes in Computer Science, pages 93-122. Springer, 2016. URL: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-662-53015-3_4.
  22. Nelly Fazio, Rosario Gennaro, Tahereh Jafarikhah, and William E. Skeith III. Homomorphic secret sharing from Paillier encryption. In Provable Security, 2017. Google Scholar
  23. Ingerid Fosli, Yuval Ishai, Victor I Kolobov, and Mary Wootters. On the download rate of homomorphic secret sharing. In 13th Innovations in Theoretical Computer Science Conference (ITCS 2022). Schloss Dagstuhl - Leibniz-Zentrum für Informatik, 2022. Google Scholar
  24. Valerii Denisovich Goppa. Codes associated with divisors. Problemy Peredachi Informatsii, 13(1):33-39, 1977. Google Scholar
  25. Venkatesan Guruswami, Atri Rudra, and Madhu Sudan. Essential coding theory. Draft from http://www.cse.buffalo.edu/atri/courses/coding-theory/book, 2019. Google Scholar
  26. James William Peter Hirschfeld, Gábor Korchmáros, and Fernando Torres. Algebraic curves over a finite field, volume 20. Princeton University Press, 2008. Google Scholar
  27. Mitsuru Ito, Akira Saito, and Takao Nishizeki. Secret sharing scheme realizing general access structure. Electronics and Communications in Japan (Part III: Fundamental Electronic Science), 72(9):56-64, 1989. Google Scholar
  28. Claudio Orlandi, Peter Scholl, and Sophia Yakoubov. The rise of paillier: Homomorphic secret sharing and public-key silent OT. In EUROCRYPT 2021, Part I, pages 678-708, 2021. Google Scholar
  29. Lawrence Roy and Jaspal Singh. Large message homomorphic secret sharing from DCR and applications. In CRYPTO 2021, Part III, pages 687-717, 2021. Google Scholar
  30. Henning Stichtenoth. Algebraic Function Fields and Codes. Springer Publishing Company, Incorporated, 2nd edition, 2008. Google Scholar
  31. M. Van der Vlugt. The true dimension of certain binary goppa codes. IEEE Transactions on Information Theory, 36(2):397-398, 1990. URL: https://doi.org/10.1109/18.52487.
Any Issues?
X

Feedback on the Current Page

CAPTCHA

Thanks for your feedback!

Feedback submitted to Dagstuhl Publishing

Could not send message

Please try again later or send an E-mail
© 2023-2025 Schloss Dagstuhl – LZI GmbH About DROPS Imprint Privacy Contact