Advertisement

More Efficient Oblivious Transfer Extensions with Security for Malicious Adversaries

  • Gilad AsharovEmail author
  • Yehuda Lindell
  • Thomas Schneider
  • Michael Zohner
Conference paper
Part of the Lecture Notes in Computer Science book series (LNCS, volume 9056)

Abstract

Oblivious transfer (OT) is one of the most fundamental primitives in cryptography and is widely used in protocols for secure two-party and multi-party computation. As secure computation becomes more practical, the need for practical large scale oblivious transfer protocols is becoming more evident. Oblivious transfer extensions are protocols that enable a relatively small number of “base-OTs” to be utilized to compute a very large number of OTs at low cost. In the semi-honest setting, Ishai et al. (CRYPTO 2003) presented an OT extension protocol for which the cost of each OT (beyond the base-OTs) is just a few hash function operations. In the malicious setting, Nielsen et al. (CRYPTO 2012) presented an efficient OT extension protocol for the setting of active adversaries, that is secure in the random oracle model.

In this work, we present an OT extension protocol for the setting of malicious adversaries that is more efficient and uses less communication than previous works. In addition, our protocol can be proven secure in both the random oracle model, and in the standard model with a type of correlation robustness. Given the importance of OT in many secure computation protocols, increasing the efficiency of OT extensions is another important step forward to making secure computation practical.

Keywords

Oblivious transfer extensions Concrete efficiency Secure computation 

References

  1. 1.
    Asharov, G., Lindell, Y., Schneider, T., Zohner, M.: More efficient oblivious transfer and extensions for faster secure computation. In: ACM Computer and Communications Security (CCS 2013), pp. 535–548. ACM (2013). Code: http://encrypto.de/code/OTExtension
  2. 2.
    Asharov, G., Lindell, Y., Schneider, T., Zohner, M.: More efficient oblivious transfer extensions with security for malicious adversaries (full version). IACR Cryptology ePrint Archive 2015, 061 (2015). Online: http://eprint.iacr.org/2015/061
  3. 3.
    Aumann, Y., Lindell, Y.: Security against covert adversaries: Efficient protocols for realistic adversaries. Journal of Cryptology 23(2), 281–343 (2010)CrossRefzbMATHMathSciNetGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Beaver, D.: Correlated pseudorandomness and the complexity of private computations. In: Symposium on the Theory of Computing (STOC 1996), pp. 479–488. ACM (1996)Google Scholar
  5. 5.
    Damgård, I., Lauritsen, R., Toft, T.: An empirical study and some improvements of the MiniMac protocol for secure computation. In: Abdalla, M., De Prisco, R. (eds.) SCN 2014. LNCS, vol. 8642, pp. 398–415. Springer, Heidelberg (2014) CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Damgård, I., Zakarias, S.: Constant-overhead secure computation of Boolean circuits using preprocessing. In: Sahai, A. (ed.) TCC 2013. LNCS, vol. 7785, pp. 621–641. Springer, Heidelberg (2013) CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Dong, C., Chen, L., Wen, Z.: When private set intersection meets big data: An efficient and scalable protocol. In: ACM Computer and Communications Security (CCS 2013), pp. 789–800. ACM (2013)Google Scholar
  8. 8.
    Ejgenberg, Y., Farbstein, M., Levy, M., Lindell, Y.: SCAPI: the secure computation application programming interface. IACR Cryptology ePrint Archive 2012, 629 (2012). Online: http://eprint.iacr.org/2012/629
  9. 9.
    Even, S., Goldreich, O., Lempel, A.: A randomized protocol for signing contracts. Communications of the ACM 28(6), 637–647 (1985)CrossRefMathSciNetGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Frederiksen, T.K., Jakobsen, T.P., Nielsen, J.B.: Faster maliciously secure two-party computation using the GPU. In: Abdalla, M., De Prisco, R. (eds.) SCN 2014. LNCS, vol. 8642, pp. 358–379. Springer, Heidelberg (2014) CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Frederiksen, T.K., Nielsen, J.B.: Fast and maliciously secure two-party computation using the GPU. In: Jacobson, M., Locasto, M., Mohassel, P., Safavi-Naini, R. (eds.) ACNS 2013. LNCS, vol. 7954, pp. 339–356. Springer, Heidelberg (2013) CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Goldreich, O., Micali, S., Wigderson, A.: How to play any mental game or a completeness theorem for protocols with honest majority. In: Symposium on Theory of Computing (STOC 1987), pp. 218–229. ACM (1987)Google Scholar
  13. 13.
    Harnik, D., Ishai, Y., Kushilevitz, E., Nielsen, J.B.: OT-combiners via secure computation. In: Canetti, R. (ed.) TCC 2008. LNCS, vol. 4948, pp. 393–411. Springer, Heidelberg (2008) CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Huang, Y., Katz, J., Kolesnikov, V., Kumaresan, R., Malozemoff, A.J.: Amortizing garbled circuits. In: Garay, J.A., Gennaro, R. (eds.) CRYPTO 2014, Part II. LNCS, vol. 8617, pp. 458–475. Springer, Heidelberg (2014) CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Impagliazzo, R., Rudich, S.: Limits on the provable consequences of one-way permutations. In: Goldwasser, S. (ed.) CRYPTO 1988. LNCS, vol. 403, pp. 8–26. Springer, Heidelberg (1990) CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Ishai, Y., Kilian, J., Nissim, K., Petrank, E.: Extending oblivious transfers efficiently. In: Boneh, D. (ed.) CRYPTO 2003. LNCS, vol. 2729, pp. 145–161. Springer, Heidelberg (2003) CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    Jawurek, M., Kerschbaum, F., Orlandi, C.: Zero-knowledge using garbled circuits: How to prove non-algebraic statements efficiently. In: ACM Computer and Communications Security (CCS 2013), pp. 955–966. ACM (2013)Google Scholar
  18. 18.
    Kolesnikov, V., Kumaresan, R.: Improved OT extension for transferring short secrets. In: Canetti, R., Garay, J.A. (eds.) CRYPTO 2013, Part II. LNCS, vol. 8043, pp. 54–70. Springer, Heidelberg (2013) CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. 19.
    Kreuter, B., Shelat, A., Shen, C.: Billion-gate secure computation with malicious adversaries. In: USENIX Security Symposium 2012, pp. 285–300. USENIX (2012)Google Scholar
  20. 20.
    Larraia, E.: Extending oblivious transfer efficiently, or - how to get active security with constant cryptographic overhead. In: Aranha, D.F., Menezes, A. (eds.) LATINCRYPT 2014. LNCS, vol. 8895, pp. 336–384. Springer, Heidelberg (2015). Online: http://eprint.iacr.org/2014/692 Google Scholar
  21. 21.
    Larraia, E., Orsini, E., Smart, N.P.: Dishonest majority multi-party computation for binary circuits. In: Garay, J.A., Gennaro, R. (eds.) CRYPTO 2014, Part II. LNCS, vol. 8617, pp. 495–512. Springer, Heidelberg (2014) CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. 22.
    Lindell, Y., Pinkas, B.: An efficient protocol for secure two-party computation in the presence of malicious adversaries. In: Naor, M. (ed.) EUROCRYPT 2007. LNCS, vol. 4515, pp. 52–78. Springer, Heidelberg (2007) CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. 23.
    Lindell, Y., Pinkas, B.: Secure two-party computation via cut-and-choose oblivious transfer. In: Ishai, Y. (ed.) TCC 2011. LNCS, vol. 6597, pp. 329–346. Springer, Heidelberg (2011) CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. 24.
    Lindell, Y., Pinkas, B., Smart, N.P.: Implementing two-party computation efficiently with security against malicious adversaries. In: Ostrovsky, R., De Prisco, R., Visconti, I. (eds.) SCN 2008. LNCS, vol. 5229, pp. 2–20. Springer, Heidelberg (2008) CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. 25.
    Lindell, Y., Riva, B.: Cut-and-choose Yao-based secure computation in the online/offline and batch settings. In: Garay, J.A., Gennaro, R. (eds.) CRYPTO 2014, Part II. LNCS, vol. 8617, pp. 476–494. Springer, Heidelberg (2014) CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. 26.
    Lindell, Y., Zarosim, H.: On the feasibility of extending oblivious transfer. In: Sahai, A. (ed.) TCC 2013. LNCS, vol. 7785, pp. 519–538. Springer, Heidelberg (2013) CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. 27.
    Lovász, L., Plummer, M.: Matching Theory. Akadémiai Kiadó, Budapest (1986), also published as, Vol. 121 of the North-Holland Mathematics Studies, North-Holland Publishing, AmsterdamGoogle Scholar
  28. 28.
    Naor, M., Pinkas, B.: Efficient oblivious transfer protocols. In: Symposium on Discrete Algorithms (SODA 2001), pp. 448–457. ACM/SIAM (2001)Google Scholar
  29. 29.
    Nielsen, J.B.: Extending oblivious transfers efficiently - how to get robustness almost for free. IACR Cryptology ePrint Archive 2007, 215 (2007). Online: http://eprint.iacr.org/2007/215
  30. 30.
    Nielsen, J.B., Nordholt, P.S., Orlandi, C., Burra, S.S.: A new approach to practical active-secure two-party computation. In: Safavi-Naini, R., Canetti, R. (eds.) CRYPTO 2012. LNCS, vol. 7417, pp. 681–700. Springer, Heidelberg (2012) CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. 31.
    Peikert, C., Vaikuntanathan, V., Waters, B.: A framework for efficient and composable oblivious transfer. In: Wagner, D. (ed.) CRYPTO 2008. LNCS, vol. 5157, pp. 554–571. Springer, Heidelberg (2008) CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. 32.
    Pinkas, B., Schneider, T., Smart, N.P., Williams, S.C.: Secure two-party computation is practical. In: Matsui, M. (ed.) ASIACRYPT 2009. LNCS, vol. 5912, pp. 250–267. Springer, Heidelberg (2009) CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. 33.
    Rabin, M.O.: How to exchange secrets with oblivious transfer, TR-81 edn. Aiken Computation Lab, Harvard University (1981)Google Scholar
  34. 34.
    Shelat, A., Shen, C.H.: Fast two-party secure computation with minimal assumptions. In: ACM Computer and Communications Security (CCS 2013), pp. 523–534. ACM (2013)Google Scholar
  35. 35.
    Yao, A.C.: How to generate and exchange secrets. In: Foundations of Computer Science (FOCS 1986), pp. 162–167. IEEE (1986)Google Scholar

Copyright information

© International Association for Cryptologic Research 2015

Authors and Affiliations

  • Gilad Asharov
    • 1
    Email author
  • Yehuda Lindell
    • 2
  • Thomas Schneider
    • 3
  • Michael Zohner
    • 3
  1. 1.The Hebrew University of JerusalemJerusalemIsrael
  2. 2.Bar-Ilan UniversityRamat GanIsrael
  3. 3.TU DarmstadtDarmstadtGermany

Personalised recommendations