Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Primitives towards verifiable computation: a survey

  • Review Article
  • Published:
Frontiers of Computer Science Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Verifiable computation (VC) paradigm has got the captivation that in real term is highlighted by the concept of third party computation. In more explicate terms, VC allows resource constrained clients/organizations to securely outsource expensive computations to untrusted service providers, while acquiring the publicly or privately verifiable results. Many mainstream solutions have been proposed to address the diverse problems within the VC domain. Some of them imposed assumptions over performed computations, while the others took advantage of interactivity /non-interactivity, zero knowledge proofs, and arguments. Further proposals utilized the powers of probabilistic checkable or computationally sound proofs. In this survey, we present a chronological study and classify the VC proposals based on their adopted domains. First, we provide a broader overview of the theoretical advancements while critically analyzing them. Subsequently, we present a comprehensive view of their utilization in the state of the art VC approaches. Moreover, a brief overview of recent proof based VC systems is also presented that lifted up the VC domain to the verge of practicality. We use the presented study and reviewed results to identify the similarities and alterations, modifications, and hybridization of different approaches, while comparing their advantages and reporting their overheads. Finally, we discuss implementation of such VC based systems, their applications, and the likely future directions.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. Gennaro R, Gentry C, Parno B. Non-interactive verifiable computing: outsourcing computation to untrusted workers. In: Proceedings of Annual Cryptology Conference. 2010, 465–482

    Google Scholar 

  2. Goldwasser S, Kalai Y T, Rothblum G N. Delegating computation: interactive proofs for muggles. In: Proceedings of the 40th Annual ACM Symposium on Theory of Computing. 2008, 113–122

    Google Scholar 

  3. Anderson D P. Public computing: reconnecting people to science. In: Proceedings of Conference on Shared Knowledge and the Web. 2003, 17–19

    Google Scholar 

  4. Anderson D P. BOINC: a system for public-resource computing and storage. In: Proceedings of the 5th IEEE/ACM International Workshop on Grid Computing. 2004, 4–10

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  5. Anderson D P, Cobb J, Korpela E, Lebofsky M, Werthimer D. SETI@home: an experiment in public-resource computing. Communications of the ACM, 2002, 45(11): 56–61

    Article  Google Scholar 

  6. Mell P, Grance T. The NIST definition of cloud computing. National Institute of Standards and Technology, 2009, 53(6): 50

    Google Scholar 

  7. Goldwasser S, Micali S, Racko C. The knowledge complexity of interactive proof systems. SIAM Journal on computing, 1989, 18(1): 186–208

    Article  MathSciNet  MATH  Google Scholar 

  8. Babai L. Trading group theory for randomness. In: Proceedings of the 17th Annual ACM Symposium on Theory of Computing. 1985, 421–429

    Google Scholar 

  9. Babai L, Fortnow L, Levin L A, Szegedy M. Checking computations in polylogarithmic time. In: Proceedings of the 23rd Annual ACM Symposium on Theory of Computing. 1991, 21–32

    Google Scholar 

  10. Arora S, Safra S. Probabilistic checking of proofs: a new characterization of NP. Journal of the ACM, 1998, 45(1): 70–122

    Article  MathSciNet  MATH  Google Scholar 

  11. Arora S, Lund C, Motwani R, Sudan M, Szegedy M. Proof verification and the hardness of approximation problems. Journal of the ACM, 1998, 45(3): 501–555

    Article  MathSciNet  MATH  Google Scholar 

  12. Kilian J. A note on efficient zero-knowledge proofs and arguments. In: Proceedings of the 24th Annual ACM Symposium on Theory of Computing. 1992, 723–732

    Google Scholar 

  13. Kilian J. Improved efficient arguments. In: Proceedings of Annual International Cryptology Conference. 1995, 311–324

    Google Scholar 

  14. Micali S. Computationally sound proofs. SIAM Journal on Computing, 2000, 30(4): 1253–1298

    Article  MathSciNet  MATH  Google Scholar 

  15. Shamir A. IP=PSPACE. Journal of the ACM, 1992, 39(4): 869–877

    Article  MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  16. Lund C, Fortnow L, Karlo H, Nisan N. Algebraic methods for interactive proof systems. Journal of the ACM, 1992, 39(4): 859–868

    Article  MathSciNet  MATH  Google Scholar 

  17. Chung K M, Kalai Y, Vadhan S. Improved delegation of computation using fully homomorphic encryption. In: Proceedings of Annual Cryptology Conference. 2010, 483–501

    MATH  Google Scholar 

  18. Goldwasser S, Sipser M. Private coins versus public coins in interactive proof systems. In: Proceedings of the 18th Annual ACM Symposium on Theory of Computing. 1986, 59–68

    Google Scholar 

  19. Ben-Or M, Goldwasser S, Kilian J, Wigderson A. Multi-prover interactive proofs: how to remove intractability assumptions. In: Proceedings of the 20th Annual ACM Symposium on Theory of Computing. 1988, 113–131

    Google Scholar 

  20. Babai L, Fortnow L, Lund C. Non-deterministic exponential time has two-prover interactive protocols. Computational Complexity, 1991, 1(1): 3–40

    Article  MathSciNet  MATH  Google Scholar 

  21. Goldreich O, Micali S, Wigderson A. Proofs that yield nothing but their validity or all languages in NP have zero-knowledge proof systems. Journal of the ACM, 1991, 38(3): 690–728

    Article  MathSciNet  MATH  Google Scholar 

  22. Ben-Or M, Goldreich O, Goldwasser S, Håstad J, Kilian J, Micali S, Rogaway P. Everything provable is provable in zero-knowledge. In: Proceedings of Conference on the Theory and Application of Cryptography. 1988, 37–56

    Google Scholar 

  23. Fortnow L. The complexity of perfect zero-knowledge. In: Proceedings of the 19th Annual ACM Symposium on Theory of Computing. 1987, 204–209

    Google Scholar 

  24. Aiello W, Hastad J. Perfect zero-knowledge languages can be recognized in two rounds. In: Proceedings of the 28th Annual Symposium on Foundations of Computer Science. 1987, 439–448

    Google Scholar 

  25. Feige U, Fiat A, Shamir A. Zero-knowledge proofs of identity. Journal of Cryptology, 1988, 1(2): 77–94

    Article  MathSciNet  MATH  Google Scholar 

  26. Fiat A, Shamir A. How to prove yourself: Practical solutions to identification and signature problems. In: Proceedings of Conference on the Theory and Application of Cryptographic Techniques. 1986, 186–194

    Google Scholar 

  27. Goldreich O, Oren Y. Definitions and properties of zero-knowledge proof systems. Journal of Cryptology, 1994, 7(1): 1–32

    Article  MathSciNet  MATH  Google Scholar 

  28. Feige U, Shamir A. Zero knowledge proofs of knowledge in two rounds. In: Proceedings of Conference on the Theory and Application of Cryptology. 1989, 526–544

    Google Scholar 

  29. Goldreich O, Kahan A. A How to construct constant-round zero knowledge proof systems for NP. Journal of Cryptology, 1996, 9(3): 167–189

    Article  MathSciNet  MATH  Google Scholar 

  30. Groth J, Ostrovsky R, Sahai A. Perfect non-interactive zero knowledge for NP. In: Proceedings of Annual International Conference on the Theory and Applications of Cryptographic Techniques. 2006, 339–358

    Google Scholar 

  31. Micali S, Rabin M, Kilian J. Zero-knowledge sets. In: Proceedings of the 44th Annual IEEE Symposium on Foundations of Computer Science. 2003, 80–91

    Google Scholar 

  32. Feige U, Goldwasser S, Lovász L, Safra S, Szegedy M. Approximating clique is almost NP-complete. In: Proceedings of the 32nd Annual Symposium on Foundations of Computer Science. 1991, 2–12

    Google Scholar 

  33. Kalai Y T, Raz R. Interactive PCP. In: Proceedings of International Colloquium on Automata, Languages, and Programming. 2008, 536–547

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  34. Kalai Y T, Raz R. Probabilistically checkable arguments. In: Halevi S, eds. Advances in Cryptology-CRYPTO. Lecture Notes in Computer Science, vol 5677. Berlin: Springer, 2009, 143–159

    Google Scholar 

  35. Cachin C, Micali S, Stadler M. Computationally private information retrieval with polylogarithmic communication. In: Proceedings of International Conference on the Theory and Applications of Cryptographic Techniques. 1999, 402–414

    Google Scholar 

  36. Bitansky N, Canetti R, Chiesa A, Tromer E. From extractable collision resistance to succinct non-interactive arguments of knowledge, and back again. In: Proceedings of the 3rd Innovations in Theoretical Computer Science Conference. 2012, 326–349

    MATH  Google Scholar 

  37. Chung K M, Kalai Y T, Liu F H, Raz R. Memory delegation. In: Proceedings of Annual Cryptology Conference. 2011, 151–168

    Google Scholar 

  38. Gentry C. A fully homomorphic encryption scheme. Dissertation for the Doctoral Degree. Stanford: Stanford University, 2009

    Google Scholar 

  39. Barak B, Goldreich O. Universal arguments and their applications. SIAM Journal on Computing, 2008, 38(5): 1661–1694

    Article  MathSciNet  MATH  Google Scholar 

  40. Goldwasser S, Lin H, Rubinstein A. Delegation of Computation without Rejection Problem from Designated Verifier CS-Proofs. IACR Cryptology ePrint Archive, 2011, 2011: 456

    Google Scholar 

  41. Sadeghi A R. Trusted computing—special aspects and challenges. In: Proceedings of International Conference on Current Trends in Theory and Practice of Computer Science. 2008, 98–117

    Google Scholar 

  42. Wen Y, Lee J, Liu Z, Zheng Q, Shi W, Xu S, Suh T. Multi-processor architectural support for protecting virtual machine privacy in untrusted cloud environment. In: Proceedings of the ACM International Conference on Computing Frontiers. 2013

    Google Scholar 

  43. Seshadri A, Luk M, Shi E, Perrig A, van Doorn L, Khosla P. Pioneer: verifying code integrity and enforcing untampered code execution on legacy systems. ACM SIGOPS Operating Systems Review, 2005, 39(5): 1–16

    Article  Google Scholar 

  44. Parno B, Mc Cune J M, Perrig A. Bootstrapping Trust in Modern Computers. Springer Science & Business Media, 2011

    Book  Google Scholar 

  45. Malkhi D, Reiter M. Byzantine quorum systems. Distributed Computing, 1998, 11(4): 203–213

    Article  MATH  Google Scholar 

  46. Canetti R, Riva B, Rothblum G N. Practical delegation of computation using multiple servers. In: Proceedings of the 18th ACM Conference on Computer and Communications Security. 2011, 445–454

    Google Scholar 

  47. Monrose F, Wycko P, Rubin A D. Distributed Execution with Remote Audit. InNDSS, 1999, 99: 3–5

    Google Scholar 

  48. Belenkiy M, Chase M, Erway C C, Jannotti J, Küpçü A, Lysyanskaya A. Incentivizing outsourced computation. In: Proceedings of the 3rd International Workshop on Economics of Networked Systems. 2008, 85–90

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  49. Yao A C. How to generate and exchange secrets. In: Proceedings of the 27th Annual Symposium on Foundations of Computer Science. 1986, 162–167

    Google Scholar 

  50. Benabbas S, Gennaro R, Vahlis Y. Verifiable delegation of computation over large datasets. In: Proceedings of Annual Cryptology Conference. 2011, 111–131

    MATH  Google Scholar 

  51. Ananth P, Chandran N, Goyal V, Kanukurthi B, Ostrovsky R. Achieving privacy in verifiable computation with multiple servers—without FHE and without pre-processing. In: Proceedings of International Workshop on Public Key Cryptography. 2014, 149–166

    Google Scholar 

  52. Fiore D, Gennaro R, Pastro V. Efficiently verifiable computation on encrypted data. In: Proceedings of the 2014 ACMSIGSAC Conference on Computer and Communications Security. 2014, 844–855

    Google Scholar 

  53. Ben-Or M, Goldwasser S, Kilian J, Wigderson A. Multi-prover interactive proofs: how to remove intractability assumptions. In: Proceedings of the 20th Annual ACM Symposium on Theory of Computing. 1988, 113–131

    Google Scholar 

  54. Setty S T, Vu V, Panpalia N, Braun B, Blumberg A J, Walfish M. Taking proof-based verified computation a few steps closer to practicality. In: Proceedings of USENIX Security Symposium. 2012, 253–268

    Google Scholar 

  55. Cormode G, Mitzenmacher M, Thaler J. Practical verified computation with streaming interactive proofs. In: Proceedings of the 3rd Innovations in Theoretical Computer Science Conference. 2012, 90–112

    Google Scholar 

  56. Setty S, Braun B, Vu V, Blumberg AJ, Parno B, Walfish M. Resolving the conflict between generality and plausibility in verified computation. In: Proceedings of the 8th ACM European Conference on Computer Systems. 2013, 71–84

    Google Scholar 

  57. Parno B, Howell J, Gentry C, Raykova M. Pinocchio: nearly practical verifiable computation. In: Proceedings of IEEE Symposium on Security and Privacy. 2013, 238–252

    Google Scholar 

  58. Costello C, Fournet C, Howell J, Kohlweiss M, Kreuter B, Naehrig M, Parno B, Zahur S. Geppetto: versatile verifiable computation. In: Proceedings of IEEE Symposium on Security and Privacy. 2015, 253–270

    Google Scholar 

  59. Ben-Sasson E, Chiesa A, Tromer E, Virza M. Succinct non-interactive zero knowledge for a von Neumann architecture. In: Proceedings of the 23rd USENIX Security Symposium. 2014

    MATH  Google Scholar 

  60. Braun B, Feldman A J, Ren Z, Setty S, Blumberg A J, Walfish M. Verifying computations with state. In: Proceedings of the 24th ACM Symposium on Operating Systems Principles. 2013, 341–357

    Google Scholar 

  61. Wahby R S, Setty S T V, Ren Z, Blumberg A J, Walfish M. Efficient RAM and control flow in verifiable outsourced computation. IACR Cryptology ePrint Archive, 2014, 2014: 674

    Google Scholar 

  62. Walfish M, Blumberg A J. Verifying computations without reexecuting them. Communications of the ACM, 2015, 58(2): 74–84

    Article  Google Scholar 

  63. Bennet S Y. Using secure coprocessors. Dissertation for the Doctoral Degree. Pittsburgh: Carnegie Mellon University, 1994

    Google Scholar 

  64. Smith S W, Weingart S. Building a high-performance, programmable secure coprocessor. Computer Networks, 1999, 31(8): 831–860

    Article  Google Scholar 

  65. Vu V, Setty S, Blumberg AJ, Walfish M. A hybrid architecture for interactive verifiable computation. In: Proceedings of IEEE Symposium on Security and Privacy. 2013, 223–237

    Google Scholar 

  66. Rothblum G N, Vadhan S, Wigderson A. Interactive proofs of proximity: delegating computation in sublinear time. In: Proceedings of the 45th Annual ACM Symposium on Theory of Computing. 2013, 793–802

    MATH  Google Scholar 

  67. Goldwasser S, Kalai Y T, Rothblum G N. Delegating computation: interactive proofs for muggles. Journal of the ACM, 2015, 62(4): 27

    Article  MathSciNet  MATH  Google Scholar 

  68. Blumberg A J, Thaler J, Vu V, Walfish M. Verifiable computation using multiple provers. IACR Cryptology ePrint Archive, 2014, 2014: 846

    Google Scholar 

  69. Goldreich O. Modern Cryptography, Probabilistic Proofs and Pseudorandomness. Springer Science & Business Media, 1998

    Google Scholar 

  70. Goldreich O. Zero-Knowledge twenty years after its invention. IACR Cryptology ePrint Archive, 2002, 2002: 186

    MATH  Google Scholar 

  71. Blum M, Feldman P, Micali S. Non-interactive zero-knowledge and its applications. In: Proceedings of the 20th Annual ACM Symposium on Theory of Computing. 1988, 103–112

    Google Scholar 

  72. Lapidot D, Shamir A. Publicly verifiable non-interactive zero knowledge proofs. In: Proceedings of Conference on the Theory and Application of Cryptography. 1990, 353–365

    Google Scholar 

  73. Groth J. Short pairing-based non-interactive zero-knowledge arguments. In: Proceedings of International Conference on the Theory and Application of Cryptology and Information Security. 2010, 321–340

    Google Scholar 

  74. Bitansky N, Canetti R, Chiesa A, Tromer E. Recursive composition and bootstrapping for SNARKs and proof-carrying data. In: Proceedings of the 45th Annual ACM Symposium on Theory of Computing. 2013, 111–120

    Google Scholar 

  75. Ben-Sasson E, Chiesa A, Tromer E, Virza M. Scalable zero knowledge via cycles of elliptic curves. In: Proceedings of International Cryptology Conference. 2014, 276–294

    MATH  Google Scholar 

  76. Chiesa A, Tromer E, Virza M. Cluster computing in zero knowledge. In: Proceedings of Annual International Conference on the Theory and Applications of Cryptographic Techniques. 2015, 371–403

    Google Scholar 

  77. Gennaro R, Gentry C, Parno B, Raykova M. Quadratic span programs and succinct NIZKs without PCPs. In: Proceedings of Annual International Conference on the Theory and Applications of Cryptographic Techniques. 2013, 626–645

    MATH  Google Scholar 

  78. Lipmaa H. Succinct non-interactive zero knowledge arguments from span programs and linear error-correcting codes. In: Proceedings of International Conference on the Theory and Application of Cryptology and Information Security. 2013, 41–60

    Google Scholar 

  79. Fauzi P, Lipmaa H, Zhang B. Efficient modular NIZK arguments from shift and product. In: Proceedings of International Conference on Cryptology and Network Security. 2013, 92–121

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  80. Lipmaa H. Almost optimal short adaptive non-interactive zero knowledge. IACR Cryptology ePrint Archive, 2014, 2014: 396

    Google Scholar 

  81. Ishai Y, Kushilevitz E, Ostrovsky R. Efficient arguments without short PCPs. In: Proceedings of the 22nd Annual IEEE Conference on Computational Complexity. 2007, 278–291

    Google Scholar 

  82. Di Crescenzo G, Lipmaa H. Succinct NP proofs from an extractability assumption. In: Proceedings of Conference on Computability in Europe. 2008, 75–185

    Google Scholar 

  83. Xu G, Amariucai G, Guan Y. Delegation of computation with verification outsourcing: curious verifiers. In: Proceedings of the 2013 ACM Symposium on Principles of Distributed Computing. 2013

    Google Scholar 

  84. Setty S, Blumberg A J, Walfish M. Toward practical and unconditional verification of remote computations. In: Proceedings of the 13th USENIX Conference on Hot Topics in Operating Systems. 2011

    Google Scholar 

  85. Chung K M, Kalai Y, Vadhan S. Improved delegation of computation using fully homomorphic encryption. In: Proceedings of Annual Cryptology Conference. 2010, 483–501

    MATH  Google Scholar 

  86. Parno B, Raykova M, Vaikuntanathan V. How to delegate and verify in public: verifiable computation from attribute-based encryption. In: Proceedings of Theory of Cryptography Conference. 2012, 422–439.

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  87. Papamanthou C, Shi E, Tamassia R. Signatures of correct computation. In: Sahai A, eds. Theory of Cryptography. Lecture Notes in Computer Science, Vol 7785. Berlin: Springer, 2013, 222–242

    MATH  Google Scholar 

  88. Choi S G, Katz J, Kumaresan R, Cid C. Multi-client non-interactive verifiable computation. In: Sahai A, eds. Theory of Cryptography. Lecture Notes in Computer Science, Vol 7785. Berlin: Springer, 2013, 499–518

    Google Scholar 

  89. Apon D, Katz J, Shi E, Thiruvengadam A. Verifiable oblivious storage. In: Proceedings of International Workshop on Public Key Cryptography. 2014, 131–148

    Google Scholar 

  90. Laud P, Pankova A. Verifiable computation in multiparty protocols with honest majority. In: Proceedings of International Conference on Provable Security. 2014, 146–161

    Google Scholar 

  91. Sahai A, Waters B. Fuzzy identity-based encryption. In: Proceedings of Annual International Conference on the Theory and Applications of Cryptographic Techniques. 2005, 457–473

    Google Scholar 

  92. Goyal V, Pandey O, Sahai A, Waters B. Attribute-based encryption for fine-grained access control of encrypted data. In: Proceedings of the 13th ACM Conference on Computer and Communications Security. 2006, 89–98

    Google Scholar 

  93. Alderman J, Janson C, Cid C, Crampton J. Revocation in publicly verifiable outsourced computation. In: Proceedings of International Workshop on Public Key Cryptography. 2014, 51–71

    Google Scholar 

  94. Alderman J, Janson C, Cid C, Crampton J. Access control in publicly verifiable outsourced computation. In: Proceedings of the 10th ACM Symposium on Information, Computer and Communications Security. 2015, 657–662

    Google Scholar 

  95. Alderman J, Janson C, Cid C, Crampton J. Hybrid publicly verifiable computation. In: Proceedings of Cryptographers’ Track at the RSA Conference. 2016, 147–163

    Google Scholar 

  96. Gordon S D, Katz J, Liu F H, Shi E, Zhou H S. Multi-client verifiable computation with stronger security guarantees. In: Proceedings of Theory of Cryptography Conference. 2015, 144–168

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  97. Backes M, Fiore D, Reischuk R M. Verifiable delegation of computation on outsourced data. In: Proceedings of the 2013 ACM SIGSAC Conference on Computer & Communications Security. 2013, 863–874

    Google Scholar 

  98. Gennaro R, Wichs D. Fully homomorphic message authenticators. In: Proceedings of International Conference on the Theory and Application of Cryptology and Information Security. 2013, 301–320

    Google Scholar 

  99. Juels A, Kaliski Jr B S. PORs: proofs of retrievability for large files. In: Proceedings of the 14th ACM Conference on Computer and Communications Security. 2007, 584–597

    Google Scholar 

  100. Fiore D, Gennaro R. Publicly verifiable delegation of large polynomials and matrix computations, with applications. In: Proceedings of the 2012 ACM Conference on Computer and Communications Security. 2012, 501–512

    Google Scholar 

  101. Schröder D, Schröder H. Verifiable data streaming. In: Proceedings of the 2012 ACM Conference on Computer and Communications Security. 2012, 953–964

    Google Scholar 

  102. Krupp J, Schröder D, Simkin M, Fiore D, Ateniese G, Nuernberger S. Nearly optimal verifiable data streaming. In: Cheng C M, Chung K M, Persiano G, et al., eds. Public-Key Cryptography–PKC 2016. Lecture Notes in Computer Science, Vol 9614. Berlin: Springer, 2016

    Google Scholar 

  103. Blanton M, Zhang Y, Frikken K B. Secure and verifiable outsourcing of large-scale biometric computations. ACM Transactions on Information and System Security, 2013, 16(3): 11

    Article  Google Scholar 

  104. Li J, Jia C, Li J, Chen X. Outsourcing encryption of attribute-based encryption with MapReduce. In: Proceedings of International Conference on Information and Communications Security. 2012, 191–201

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  105. Sahai A, Seyalioglu H, Waters B. Dynamic credentials and cipher text delegation for attribute-based encryption. In: Safavi-Naini R, Canetti R, eds. Advances in Cryptology–CRYPTO 2012. Lecture Notes in Computer Science, Vol 7417. Berlin: Springer, 2012, 199–217

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  106. Li J, Huang X, Li J, Chen X, Xiang Y. Securely outsourcing attribute based encryption with checkability. IEEE Transactions on Parallel and Distributed Systems, 2014, 25(8): 2201–2210

    Article  Google Scholar 

  107. Li J, Li X, Wang L, He D, Ahmad H, Niu X. Fuzzy encryption in cloud computation: efficient verifiable outsourced attribute-based encryption. Soft Computing. 2017, 1–8

    Google Scholar 

  108. Carter H, Mood B, Traynor P, Butler K. Secure outsourced garbled circuit evaluation for mobile devices. Journal of Computer Security, 2016, 24(2): 137–180

    Article  Google Scholar 

  109. Carter H, Lever C, Traynor P. Whitewash: outsourcing garbled circuit generation for mobile devices. In: Proceedings of the 30th Annual Computer Security Applications Conference. 2014, 266–275

    Google Scholar 

  110. Chen X, Li J, Ma J, Tang Q, Lou W. New algorithms for secure outsourcing of modular exponentiations. IEEE Transactions on Parallel and Distributed Systems, 2014, 25(9): 2386–2396

    Article  Google Scholar 

  111. Kiraz M S, Uzunkol O. Efficient and verifiable algorithms for secure outsourcing of cryptographic computations. International Journal of Information Security, 2016, 15(5): 519–537

    Article  Google Scholar 

  112. Ben-Sasson E, Chiesa A, Genkin D, Tromer E, Virza M. SNARKs for C: verifying program executions succinctly and in zero knowledge. In: Canetti R, Garay J A, eds. Advances in Cryptology–CRYPTO 2013. Lecture Notes in Computer Science, Vol 8043. Berlin: Springer, 2013, 90–108

    Chapter  MATH  Google Scholar 

  113. Kosba A E, Papadopoulos D, Papamanthou C, Sayed M F, Shi E, Triandopoulos N. TRUESET: faster verifiable set computations. USENIX Security, 2014, 81(84): 153

    Google Scholar 

  114. Thaler J, Roberts M, Mitzenmacher M, Pfister H. Verifiable computation with massively parallel interactive proofs. In: Proceedings of HotCloud. 2012

    Google Scholar 

  115. Thaler J. Time-optimal interactive proofs for circuit evaluation. In: Canetti R, Garay J A, eds. Advances in Cryptology–CRYPTO 2013. Lecture Notes in Computer Science, Vol 8043. Berlin: Springer, 2013, 71–89

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  116. Wang L C, LI J, Ahmad H. Challenges of fully homomorphic encryptions for the Internet of things. IEICE Transactions on Information and Systems, 2016, 99(8): 1982–1990

    Article  Google Scholar 

  117. Hong H, Wang L, Ahmad H, Yang Y, Qu Z. Minimum length key in MST cryptosystems. Science China Information Sciences, 2017, 60(5): 05210

    Article  MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgements

This work was supported by the National Natural Science Foundation of China (NSFC) (Grant Nos. 61370194, 61411146001, and 61502048).

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. State Key Laboratory of Networking and Switching Technology, Beijing University of Posts and Telecommunications, Beijing, 100876, China

    Haseeb Ahmad, Licheng Wang, Jing Li & Yixian Yang

  2. School of Computer Science and Information Engineering, Zhejiang Gongshang University, Hangzhou, 310018, China

    Haibo Hong

  3. Department of Computer Engineering, University of Engineering and Technology, Taxila, 47050, Pakistan

    Hassan Dawood

  4. Future Internet & Communication Lab, Department of Electronic Engineering, Tsinghua University, Beijing, 100084, China

    Manzoor Ahmed

Authors
  1. Haseeb Ahmad
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Licheng Wang
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Haibo Hong
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  4. Jing Li
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  5. Hassan Dawood
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  6. Manzoor Ahmed
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  7. Yixian Yang
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Licheng Wang.

Additional information

Haseeb Ahmad received the BS degree in mathematics from G.C. University, Faisalabad, Pakistan in 2010, and the master degree in computer science from Virtual University, Pakistan in 2012. He is currently a PhD student in School of Computer Science at Beijing University of Posts and Telecommunications, China. His current research interest includes information security.

Licheng Wang received the BS degree from Northwest Normal University, China in 1995, the MS degree from Nanjing University, China in 2001, and the PhD degree from Shanghai Jiao Tong University, China in 2007. He is an associate professor in Beijing University of Posts and Telecommunications, China. His current research interests include modern cryptography, network security, trust management, etc.

Haibo Hong received the BS degree from Fuyang Normal University, China in 2008, the MS degree from Capital Normal University, China in 2011, and the PhD degree from Beijing University of Posts and Telecommunications, China in 2015. He is now a lecturer in Zhejiang Gongshang University, China. His current research interests include modern cryptography, network security etc.

Jing Li received the BS degree from Inner Mongol Normal University, China in 2010, and the MS degree from Shanxi Normal University, China in 2013. She is a now a PhD candidate studying in Beijing University of Posts and Telecommunications, China. Her current research interests include modern cryptography, network security, finite field and its applications, etc.

Hassan Dawood is working as an assistant professor at Department of Computer Engineering, University of Engineering and Technology, Pakistan. He has received his MS and PhD degrees in computer application technology from Beijing Normal University, China in 2012 and 2015, respectively. His research interests include image restoration, feature extraction and image classification.

Manzoor Ahmed is currently working as postdoc candidate at Department of Electronic Engineering, Tsinghua University, China. He has completed the PhD degree from the Beijing University of Posts and Telecommunications, China in 2015. He received the M.Phil and BE degree from Pakistan. His research interests include the non-cooperative and cooperative game theoretic based resource management in hierarchical heterogeneous networks, interference management in small cell networks, and 5G networks, physical layer security and information security.

Yixian Yang is a professor of Computer Science and Technology at Beijing University of Posts and Telecommunications (BUPT), China and also the director of the National Engineering Laboratory for Disaster Backup and Recovery of China. He is a fellow of China Institute of Communications (CIC), and a council member of Chinese Institute of Electronics (CIE) and Chinese Association for Cryptologic Research (CACR). He is the editor in chief of Journal on Communications of China. He received his MS degree in applied mathematics and PhD degree in signal and information processing from BUPT in 1986 and 1988, respectively. His research interests include coding theory and cryptography, information security and network security, disaster backup and recovery, signal and information processing, etc.

Electronic supplementary material

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Ahmad, H., Wang, L., Hong, H. et al. Primitives towards verifiable computation: a survey. Front. Comput. Sci. 12, 451–478 (2018). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11704-016-6148-4

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11704-016-6148-4

Keywords

Search

Navigation