K-Anonymous Message Transmission Luis von Ahn Andrew Bortz Nick Hopper The Aladdin Center Carnegie Mellon University.

Slides:



Advertisements
Similar presentations
Revisiting the efficiency of malicious two party computation David Woodruff MIT.
Advertisements

Efficient Zero-Knowledge Argument for Correctness of a Shuffle Stephanie Bayer University College London Jens Groth University College London.
Secure Multiparty Computations on Bitcoin
Cryptography for Unconditionally Secure Message Transmission in Networks Kaoru Kurosawa.
Efficient Zero-Knowledge Proof Systems Jens Groth University College London.
Mental Poker The SRA Protocol. What is Mental Poker? Playing poker without cards (ie over telephone or internet). No Trusted Third Party or source of.
Efficient Two-party and Multiparty Computation against Covert Adversaries Vipul Goyal Payman Mohassel Adam Smith Penn Sate UCLAUC Davis.
CS555Topic 241 Cryptography CS 555 Topic 24: Secure Function Evaluation.
Rennes, 24/10/2014 Cristina Onete CIDRE/ INRIA Sigma Protocols and (Non-Interactive) Zero Knowledge.
Computational Security. Overview Goal: Obtain computational security against an active adversary. Hope: under a reasonable cryptographic assumption, obtain.
Introduction to Modern Cryptography, Lecture 12 Secure Multi-Party Computation.
Eran Omri, Bar-Ilan University Joint work with Amos Beimel and Ilan Orlov, BGU Ilan Orlov…!??!!
Receipt-Free Universally-Verifiable Voting With Everlasting Privacy Tal Moran Joint work with Moni Naor.
Short course on quantum computing Andris Ambainis University of Latvia.
Efficient Zero-Knowledge Proof Systems Jens Groth University College London FOSAD 2014.
Improving the Round Complexity of VSS in Point-to-Point Networks Jonathan Katz (University of Maryland) Chiu-Yuen Koo (Google Labs) Ranjit Kumaresan (University.
Slide 1 Vitaly Shmatikov CS 380S Introduction to Zero-Knowledge.
Zero-Knowledge Proofs J.W. Pope M.S. – Mathematics May 2004.
Yan Huang, Jonathan Katz, David Evans University of Maryland, University of Virginia Efficient Secure Two-Party Computation Using Symmetric Cut-and-Choose.
COVERT MULTI-PARTY COMPUTATION YINMENG ZHANG ALADDIN REU 2005 LUIS VON AHN MANUEL BLUM.
Introduction to Modern Cryptography, Lecture 13 Money Related Issues ($$$) and Odds and Ends.
CSCE 715 Ankur Jain 11/16/2010. Introduction Design Goals Framework SDT Protocol Achievements of Goals Overhead of SDT Conclusion.
CS426Fall 2010/Lecture 351 Computer Security CS 426 Lecture 35 Commitment & Zero Knowledge Proofs.
Explorations in Anonymous Communication Andrew Bortz with Luis von Ahn Nick Hopper Aladdin Center, Carnegie Mellon University, 8/19/2003.
COVERT TWO-PARTY COMPUTATION LUIS VON AHN CARNEGIE MELLON UNIVERSITY JOINT WORK WITH NICK HOPPER JOHN LANGFORD.
Oblivious Transfer based on the McEliece Assumptions
A Secure Fault-Tolerant Conference- Key Agreement Protocol Wen-Guey Tzeng Source : IEEE Transactions on computers Speaker : LIN, KENG-CHU.

ITIS 6200/8200. time-stamping services Difficult to verify the creation date and accurate contents of a digital file Required properties of time-stamping.
Electronic Voting Schemes and Other stuff. Requirements Only eligible voters can vote (once only) No one can tell how voter voted Publish who voted (?)
1 Zaps and Apps Cynthia Dwork Microsoft Research Moni Naor Weizmann Institute of Science.
CMSC 414 Computer and Network Security Lecture 19 Jonathan Katz.
Introduction to Modern Cryptography, Lecture 7/6/07 Zero Knowledge and Applications.
Optimistic Synchronous Multi-Party Contract Signing N. Asokan, Baum-Waidner, M. Schunter, M. Waidner Presented By Uday Nayak Advisor: Chris Lynch.
Aladdin Center, Carnegie Mellon University Deniable and Traceable Anonymity Andrew Bortz Joint work with: Luis von Ahn Nick Hopper Kevin O’Neill (Cornell)
DANSS Colloquium By Prof. Danny Dolev Presented by Rica Gonen
Introduction to Modern Cryptography, Lecture 9 More about Digital Signatures and Identification.
Chapter 9 Cryptographic Protocol Cryptography-Principles and Practice Harbin Institute of Technology School of Computer Science and Technology Zhijun Li.
Anonymous Communication Luis von Ahn Andrew Bortz Nick Hopper The Aladdin Center Carnegie Mellon University.
Slide 1 Vitaly Shmatikov CS 380S Oblivious Transfer and Secure Multi-Party Computation With Malicious Parties.
13.1 Copyright © The McGraw-Hill Companies, Inc. Permission required for reproduction or display. Chapter 13 Digital Signature.
On the Anonymity of Anonymity Systems Andrei Serjantov (anonymous)
How to play ANY mental game
A Few Simple Applications to Cryptography Louis Salvail BRICS, Aarhus University.
Chapter 4: Intermediate Protocols
Secure Multi-Party Quantum Computation Michael Ben-Or QCrypt 2013 Tutorial M. Ben-Or, C. Crépeau, D. Gottesman, A.Hassidim, A. Smith, arxiv.org/abs/
Robust Sharing of Secrets when the Dealer Is Honest or Cheating Tal Rabin 1994 Brian Fry COEN
Wonders of the Digital Envelope Avi Wigderson Institute for Advanced Study.
Fall 2004/Lecture 201 Cryptography CS 555 Lecture 20-b Zero-Knowledge Proof.
Privacy Enhancing Technologies Spring What is Privacy? “The right to be let alone” Confidentiality Anonymity Access Control Most privacy technologies.
Based on Schneier Chapter 5: Advanced Protocols Dulal C. Kar.
Introduction to Modern Cryptography Sharif University Spring 2015 Data and Network Security Lab Sharif University of Technology Department of Computer.
Cryptography In the Bounded Quantum-Storage Model Christian Schaffner, BRICS University of Århus, Denmark ECRYPT Autumn School, Bertinoro Wednesday, October.
Presented by: Suparita Parakarn Kinzang Wangdi Research Report Presentation Computer Network Security.
Password Mistyping in Two-Factor Authenticated Key Exchange Vladimir KolesnikovCharles Rackoff Bell LabsU. Toronto ICALP 2008.
Digital Signatures, Message Digest and Authentication Week-9.
Zero-knowledge proof protocols 1 CHAPTER 12: Zero-knowledge proof protocols One of the most important, and at the same time very counterintuitive, primitives.
PROACTIVE SECRET SHARING Or: How to Cope With Perpetual Leakage Herzberg et al. Presented by: Avinash Ravi Kevin Skapinetz.
Security for Broadcast Network
Software Security Seminar - 1 Chapter 4. Intermediate Protocols 발표자 : 이장원 Applied Cryptography.
Andrew Lindell Aladdin Knowledge Systems and Bar-Ilan University 04/08/08 CRYP-106 Efficient Fully-Simulatable Oblivious Transfer.
 5.1 Zero-Knowledge Proofs  5.2 Zero-Knowledge Proofs of Identity  5.3 Identity-Based Public-Key Cryptography  5.4 Oblivious Transfer  5.5 Oblivious.
Round-Efficient Multi-Party Computation in Point-to-Point Networks Jonathan Katz Chiu-Yuen Koo University of Maryland.
David Evans CS588: Security and Privacy University of Virginia Computer Science Lecture 15: From Here to Oblivion.
SECURITY. Security Threats, Policies, and Mechanisms There are four types of security threats to consider 1. Interception 2 Interruption 3. Modification.
Cryptographic Shuffles Jens Groth University College London TexPoint fonts used in EMF. Read the TexPoint manual before you delete this box.: AAAAAAAAAAAAA.
Topic 36: Zero-Knowledge Proofs
Malicious Participants
Course Business I am traveling April 25-May 3rd
ITIS 6200/8200 Chap 5 Dr. Weichao Wang.
Presentation transcript:

k-Anonymous Message Transmission Luis von Ahn Andrew Bortz Nick Hopper The Aladdin Center Carnegie Mellon University

Adversary cannot identify the sender of a particular message Sender Anonymous Protocol

Adversary cannot identify the receiver of a particular message Receiver Anonymous Protocol Adversary cannot identify the sender of a particular message Sender Anonymous Protocol

Some Applications Distribution of Music Anonymous Crime Tips Secret Love Letters

Sender and receiver anonymity can be achieved with a trusted third party

In This Talk We will present a scheme for anonymous communication that is efficient and requires no trusted third parties

The Model Reliable Communication The adversary can own some of the participants A participant owned by the adversary may act arbitrarily The adversary can see all communications in network

The Rest of the Talk An efficient scheme DC Nets Why DC Nets have never been implemented k-Anonymity

DC Nets: Key Idea Divide time into small steps If party j doesn’t want to send a message at step t, they must send M j =0 At step t, party i wants to send message M i  Z m

DC Nets: Key Idea Divide time into small steps At step t, party i wants to send message M i  Z m If party j doesn’t want to send a message at step t, they must send M j =0 Each party i splits M i into n random shares M i = s i,1 + s i,2 + … + s i,n-1 + (M i – (s i,1 + … + s i,n-1 )) s i,n

DC Nets: Key Idea Party 1 Party 2 Party 3 Party n Party i s i,1 s i,2 s i,3 s i,n Each party distributes their n shares

DC Nets: Key Idea All parties add up every share that they have received and broadcast the result (Let B i denote Party i’s broadcast) B i = s 1,i + s 2,i + … + s n,i

DC Nets: Key Idea M i = s i,1 + s i,2 + … + s i,n-1 + s i,n B i = s 1,i + s 2,i + … + s n,i B 1 + B 2 +…+ B n = M 1 + M 2 +…+ M n All parties add up every share that they have received and broadcast the result (Let B i denote Party i’s broadcast)

DC Nets: Key Idea If only one of the M i is nonzero, then: B 1 + B 2 +…+ B n = M i

DC Nets: Problems It is very easy for the adversary to jam the channel! Communication complexity is O(n 2 )

Full Anonymity Versus k-Anonymity We will relax the requirement that the adversary learns nothing about the origin of a given message We will accept k-anonymity, in which the adversary can only narrow down his search to k participants

The Rest of the Talk An efficient scheme DC Nets Why DC Nets have never been implemented k-Anonymity

k-anonymous message transmission (k-AMT) Idea: Divide N parties into “small” DC-Nets of size O(k). Encode M t as (group, msg) pair P1 P2 P3 P4 s 1,1 +s 1,2 +s 1,3 +s 1,4 = (G t,M t ) s 1,2 s 1,3 s 1,4

How to compromise k-anonymity If everyone follows the protocol, it’s impossible to compromise the anonymity guarantee. So instead, don’t follow the protocol: if Alice can never send anonymously, she will have to communicate using onymous means.

How to break k-AMT (I) Don’t follow the protocol: after receiving shares s 1,i,…,s k,i, instead of broadcasting s i, generate a random value r and broadcast that instead. This will randomize the result of the DC- Net protocol, preventing Alice from transmitting.

Stopping the “randomizing” attack Solution: Use Verifiable Secret Sharing. Every player in the group announces (by broadcast) a commitment to all of the shares of her input. These commitments allow verification of her subsequent actions.

k-anonymous message transmission (k-AMT) with VSS Before starting, each player commits to s i,1 …s i,k viaPedersen commitment C(s,r)=g s h r P1 P2 P3 P4 s 1,1 +s 1,2 +s 1,3 +s 1,4 = x 1 = (G i,M i ) C1 1g s 1,1 h r 1,1 2g s 1,2 h r 1,2 3g s 1,3 h r 1,3 4g s 1,4 h r 1,4 C1C1 C1C1 C1C1

k-anonymous message transmission (k-AMT) with VSS Before starting, each player commits to s i,1 …s i,k viaPedersen commitment C(s,r)=g s h r P1 P2 P3 P4 s 1,1 +s 1,2 +s 1,3 +s 1,4 = x 1 = (G i,M i ) C1…k 1g s 1,1 h r 1,1 g s k,1 h r k,1 gs1hrgs1hr 2g s 1,2 h r 1,2 g s k,2 h r k,2 gs2hrgs2hr 3g s 1,3 h r 1,3 g s k,3 h r k,3 gs3hrgs3hr 4g s 1,4 h r 1,4 g s k,4 h r k,4 gs4hrgs4hr gx1hrgx1hr gxkhrgxkhr C2C2 C3C3 C4C4

How to break k-AMT (II) The multiparty sum protocol gives k participants a single shared channel: at most one person can successfully transmit each turn. So: Transmit every turn! VSS still perfectly hides the value of each input; no one will know who is hogging the line.

Accommodating more than one sender per turn Idea: we can run several turns in parallel. Instead of sending commitments to shares of a single value, generate shares of 2k values. If Alice picks a random “turn” to transmit in, she should have probability at least ½ of successfully transmitting.

Accommodating more than one sender per turn Before starting, each player picks slot s, sets x i,s = (G t,M t ), x i,1 =…=x i,2k = 0, and chooses s i,j,m so that  m s i,j,m =x i,j P1 P2 P3 P4 C1,1…1,2k 1g s 1,1,1 h r 1,1 g s 1,2k,1 h r k,1 2g s 1,1,2 h r 1,2 g s 1,2k,2 h r k,2 3g s 1,1,3 h r 1,3 g s 1,2k,,3 h r k,3 4g s 1,1,4 h r 1,4 g s 1,2k,4 h r k,4 g x 1,1 h r g x 1,k h r C 1,1..2k

Accommodating more than one sender per turn Suppose at the end of the protocol, at least k of the 2k parallel turns were empty (zero). Then Alice should be happy; she had probability ½ to transmit. If not, somebody has cheated and used at least 2 turns. How do we catch the cheater?

Catching a cheater Idea: each party can use her committed values to prove (in zero knowledge) that she transmitted in at most one slot, without revealing that slot. If someone did cheat, she will have a very low probability of convincing the group she did not.

Zero-Knowledge proof of protocol conformance P i  (All): Pick permutation ρ on {1…2k} Send C(x’) = C(x ρ(0), r’ 0 ),…, C(x ρ(2k),r’ 2k ) (All)  P i : b  {0,1} P i  (All): if b = 0: open 2k-1 0 values; else reveal ρ, prove (in ZK) x’ = ρ(x)

Efficiency O(k 2 ) protocol messages to transmit O(k) anonymous messages: O(k) message overhead Cheaters are caught with high probability Zero Knowledge proofs are Honest Verifier and can be done non-interactively in the Random Oracle Model, or interactively via an extra round (commit to verifier coins)