Abstract
Mechanisms that aggregate the possibly conflicting preferences of individual agents are studied extensively in economics, operations research, and lately computer science. Perhaps surprisingly, the classic literature assumes participating agents to act selfishly, possibly untruthfully, if it is to their advantage, whereas the mechanism center is usually assumed to be honest and trustworthy. We argue that cryptography offers various concepts and building blocks to ensure the secure, i.e., correct and private, execution of mechanisms. We propose models with and without a center that guarantee correctness and preserve the privacy of preferences relying on diverse assumptions such as the trustworthiness of the center or the hardness of computation. The decentralized model in which agents jointly “emulate” a virtual mechanism center is particularly interesting for two reasons. For one, it provides privacy without relying on a trusted third-party. Second, it enables the provably correct execution of randomized mechanisms (which is not the case in the centralized model). We furthermore point out how untruthful and multi-step mechanisms can improve privacy. In particular, we show that the fully private emulation of a preference elicitor can result in unconditional privacy of a (non-empty) subset of preferences.
This paper was originally presented at AMEC-04.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.
Access this chapter
Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout
Purchases are for personal use only
Preview
Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.
References
Avery, C., Hendershott, T.: Bundling and optimal auctions of multiple products. Review of Economic Studies 67, 483–497 (2000)
Ben-Or, M., Goldwasser, S., Wigderson, A.: Completeness theorems for non-cryptographic fault-tolerant distributed computation. In: Proc. of 20th STOC, pp. 1–10. ACM Press, New York (1988)
Blum, M.: Coin flipping by telephone. In: Proc. of 24th IEEE Spring Computer Conference, pp. 133–137. IEEE Press, Los Alamitos (1982)
Ben-Or, M., Goldreich, O., Goldwasser, S., Håstad, J., Kilian, J., Micali, S., Rogaway, P.: Everything provable is provable in zero-knowledge. In: Goldwasser, S. (ed.) CRYPTO 1988. LNCS, vol. 403, pp. 37–56. Springer, Heidelberg (1990)
Brandt, F.: Fully private auctions in a constant number of rounds. In: Wright, R.N. (ed.) FC 2003. LNCS, vol. 2742, pp. 223–238. Springer, Heidelberg (2003)
Brandt, F.: Social choice and preference protection - Towards fully private mechanism design. In: Nisan, N. (ed.) Proc. of 4th ACM Conference on Electronic Commerce, pp. 220–221. ACM Press, New York (2003)
Brandt, F., Sandholm, T. (Im)possibility of unconditionally privacy-preserving auctions. In: Sierra, C., Sonenberg, L. (eds.) Proc. of 3rd AAMAS Conference, pp. 810–817. ACM Press, New York (2004)
Bartholdi III, J., Tovey, C.A., Trick, M.A.: The computational difficulty of manipulating an election. Social Choice and Welfare 6(3), 227–241 (1989)
Chaum, D., Crépeau, C., Damgård, I.: Multi-party unconditionally secure protocols. In: Proc. of 20th STOC, pp. 11–19. ACM Press, New York (1988)
Chor, B., Kushilevitz, E.: A zero-one law for Boolean privacy. In: Proc. of 21st STOC, pp. 36–47. ACM Press, New York (1989)
Conen, W., Sandholm, T.: Preference elicitation in combinatorial auctions. In: Proc. of 3rd ACM Conference on E-Commerce, pp. 256–259. ACM Press, New York (2001)
Conitzer, V., Sandholm, T.: Complexity of mechanism design. In: Proc. of 18th Conference on Uncertainty in Artificial Intelligence (UAI), pp. 103–110 (2002)
Conitzer, V., Sandholm, T.: Vote elicitation: Complexity and strategy-proofness. In: Proc. of 18th AAAI Conference, pp. 392–397. AAAI Press, Menlo Park (2002)
Conitzer, V., Sandholm, T.: Applications of automated mechanism design. In: Proc. of UAI workshop on Bayesian Modeling Applications (2003)
Conitzer, V., Sandholm, T.: Computational criticisms of the revelation principle. In: Proc. of 5th Workshop on Agent Mediated Electronic Commerce (AMEC). LNCS. Springer, Heidelberg (2003)
Conitzer, V., Sandholm, T.: Universal voting protocol tweaks to make manipulation hard. In: Proc. of 18th IJCAI, pp. 781–788 (2003)
Diffie, W., Hellman, M.E.: New directions in cryptography. IEEE Transactions on Information Theory IT-22(6), 644–654 (1976)
Feigenbaum, J., Nisan, N., Ramachandran, V., Sami, R., Shenker, S.: Agents’ privacy in distributed algorithmic mechanisms. Position Paper (2002)
Feigenbaum, J., Shenker, S.: Distributed algorithmic mechanism design: Recent results and future directions. In: Proc. of 6th International Workshop on Discrete Algorithms and Methods for Mobile Computing and Communications, pp. 1–13. ACM Press, New York (2002)
Goldreich, O., Micali, S., Wigderson, A.: How to play any mental game or a completeness theorem for protocols with honest majority. In: Proc. of 19th STOC, pp. 218–229. ACM Press, New York (1987)
Goldreich, O.: Foundations of Cryptography. Basic Tools, vol. 1. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge (2001)
Halpern, J., Teague, V.: Rational secret sharing and multiparty computation. In: Proc. of 36th STOC, ACM Press, New York (2004)
Kikuchi, H.: (M+1)st-price auction protocol. In: Syverson, P.F. (ed.) FC 2001. LNCS, vol. 2339, pp. 351–363. Springer, Heidelberg (2002)
Kushilevitz, E.: Privacy and communication complexity. In: Proc. of 30th FOCS Symposium, pp. 416–421. IEEE Computer Society Press, Los Alamitos (1989)
Lamport, L., Shostak, R., Pease, M.: The Byzantine generals problem. ACM Transactions on Programming Languages and Systems 4(3), 382–401 (1982)
McGrew, R., Porter, R., Shoham, Y.: Towards a general theory of non-cooperative computation. In: Proc. of 9th International Conference on Theoretical Aspects of Rationality and Knowledge (TARK) (2003)
Monderer, D., Tennenholtz, M.: Distributed games: From mechanisms to protocols. In: Proc. of 15th AAAI Conference, pp. 32–37. AAAI Press, Menlo Park (1999)
Mehta, A., Vazirani, V.: Randomized truthful auctions of digital goods are randomizations over truthful auctions. In: Proc. of 5th ACM Conference on E-Commerce, pp. 120–124. ACM Press, New York (2004)
Naor, M.: Bit commitment using pseudorandomness. In: Brassard, G. (ed.) CRYPTO 1989. LNCS, vol. 435, pp. 128–137. Springer, Heidelberg (1990)
Naor, M., Pinkas, B., Sumner, R.: Privacy preserving auctions and mechanism design. In: Proc. of 1st ACM Conference on E-Commerce, pp. 129–139. ACM Press, New York (1999)
Porter, R., Shoham, Y.: On cheating in sealed-bid auctions. In: Proc. of 4th ACM Conference on E-Commerce, pp. 76–84. ACM Press, New York (2003)
Rothkopf, M.H., Teisberg, T.J., Kahn, E.P.: Why are Vickrey auctions rare? Journal of Political Economy 98(1), 94–109 (1990)
Sandholm, T.: An implementation of the contract net protocol based on marginal cost calculations. In: Proc. of 10th AAAI Conference, pp. 256–262. AAAI Press, Menlo Park (1993)
Yao, A.C.: Protocols for secure computation. In: Proc. of 23th FOCS Symposium, pp. 160–164. IEEE Computer Society Press, Los Alamitos (1982)
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Editor information
Editors and Affiliations
Rights and permissions
Copyright information
© 2006 Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg
About this paper
Cite this paper
Brandt, F., Sandholm, T. (2006). On Correctness and Privacy in Distributed Mechanisms. In: La Poutré, H., Sadeh, N.M., Janson, S. (eds) Agent-Mediated Electronic Commerce. Designing Trading Agents and Mechanisms. AMEC TADA 2005 2005. Lecture Notes in Computer Science(), vol 3937. Springer, Berlin, Heidelberg. https://doi.org/10.1007/11888727_16
Download citation
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/11888727_16
Publisher Name: Springer, Berlin, Heidelberg
Print ISBN: 978-3-540-46242-2
Online ISBN: 978-3-540-46243-9
eBook Packages: Computer ScienceComputer Science (R0)