skip to main content
10.1145/2914642.2914658acmconferencesArticle/Chapter ViewAbstractPublication PagessacmatConference Proceedingsconference-collections
research-article

Boosting GSHADE Capabilities: New Applications and Security in Malicious Setting

Published:06 June 2016Publication History

ABSTRACT

The secure two-party computation (S2PC) protocols SHADE and GSHADE have been introduced by Bringer et al. in the last two years. The protocol GSHADE permits to compute different distances (Hamming, Euclidean, Mahalanobis) quite efficiently and is one of the most efficient compared to other S2PC methods. Thus this protocol can be used to efficiently compute one-to-many identification for several biometrics data (iris, face, fingerprint).

In this paper, we introduce two extensions of GSHADE. The first one enables us to evaluate new multiplicative functions. This way, we show how to apply GSHADE to a classical machine learning algorithm. The second one is a new proposal to secure GSHADE against malicious adversaries following the recent dual execution and cut-and-choose strategies. The additional cost is very small. By preserving the GSHADE's structure, our extensions are very efficient compared to other S2PC methods.

References

  1. G. Asharov, Y. Lindell, T. Schneider, and M. Zohner. More efficient oblivious transfer and extensions for faster secure computation. In ACM SIGSAC Conference on Computer and Communications Security, CCS'13, 2013. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  2. G. Asharov, Y. Lindell, T. Schneider, and M. Zohner. More efficient oblivious transfer extensions with security for malicious adversaries. In Advances in Cryptology - EUROCRYPT 2015 - 34th Annual International Conference on the Theory and Applications of Cryptographic Techniques, 2015.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  3. S. Avidan, A. Elbaz, and T. Malkin. Privacy preserving pattern classification. In Proceedings of the International Conference on Image Processing, ICIP, 2008.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  4. F. Benhamouda, G. Couteau, D. Pointcheval, and H. Wee. Implicit zero-knowledge arguments and applications to the malicious setting. In Advances in Cryptology - CRYPTO 2015 - 35th Annual Cryptology Conference, 2015.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  5. R. Bost, R. A. Popa, S. Tu, and S. Goldwasser. Machine learning classification over encrypted data. In 22nd Annual Network and Distributed System Security Symposium, NDSS, 2015.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  6. J. Bringer, H. Chabanne, M. Favre, A. Patey, T. Schneider, and M. Zohner. GSHADE: faster privacy-preserving distance computation and biometric identification. In ACM Information Hiding and Multimedia Security Workshop, IH&MMSec, 2014. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  7. J. Bringer, H. Chabanne, and A. Patey. SHADE: secure hamming distance computation from oblivious transfer. In Financial Cryptography and Data Security - FC 2013 Workshops, USEC and WAHC, 2013.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  8. C. Cortes and V. Vapnik. Support-vector networks. Machine Learning, 20(3), 1995. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  9. I. Damgård, M. Keller, E. Larraia, V. Pastro, P. Scholl, and N. P. Smart. Practical covertly secure MPC for dishonest majority - or: Breaking the SPDZ limits. In Computer Security - ESORICS 2013 - 18th European Symposium on Research in Computer Security, 2013.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  10. I. Damgård, V. Pastro, N. P. Smart, and S. Zakarias. Multiparty computation from somewhat homomorphic encryption. In Advances in Cryptology - CRYPTO 2012 - 32nd Annual Cryptology Conference, 2012. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  11. Z. Erkin, T. Veugen, and R. L. Lagendijk. Privacy-preserving recommender systems in dynamic environments. In 2013 IEEE International Workshop on Information Forensics and Security, WIFS, 2013.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  12. C. Gentry. A fully homomorphic encryption scheme. PhD thesis, Stanford University, 2009. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  13. O. Goldreich, S. Micali, and A. Wigderson. How to play any mental game or A completeness theorem for protocols with honest majority. In Proceedings of the 19th Annual ACM Symposium on Theory of Computing, 1987. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  14. Y. Huang, D. Evans, J. Katz, and L. Malka. Faster secure two-party computation using garbled circuits. In 20th USENIX Security Symposium, 2011. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  15. Y. Huang, J. Katz, and D. Evans. Quid-pro-quo-tocols: Strengthening semi-honest protocols with dual execution. In IEEE Symposium on Security and Privacy, SP, 2012. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  16. Y. Ishai, J. Kilian, K. Nissim, and E. Petrank. Extending oblivious transfers efficiently. In Advances in Cryptology - CRYPTO 2003, 23rd Annual International Cryptology Conference, 2003.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  17. M. Keller, E. Orsini, and P. Scholl. Actively secure OT extension with optimal overhead. IACR Cryptology ePrint Archive, 2015.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  18. M. S. Kiraz, Z. A. Genç, and S. Kardas. Security and efficiency analysis of the hamming distance computation protocol based on oblivious transfer. IACR Cryptology ePrint Archive, 2014.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  19. V. Kolesnikov and T. Schneider. Improved garbled circuit: Free XOR gates and applications. In Automata, Languages and Programming, 35th International Colloquium, ICALP 2008, Part II - Track B: Logic, Semantics, and Theory of Programming & Track C: Security and Cryptography Foundations, 2008. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  20. Y. Lindell and B. Pinkas. An efficient protocol for secure two-party computation in the presence of malicious adversaries. In Advances in Cryptology - EUROCRYPT 2007, 26th Annual International Conference on the Theory and Applications of Cryptographic Techniques, 2007. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  21. M. Naor and B. Pinkas. Efficient oblivious transfer protocols. In Proceedings of the Twelfth Annual Symposium on Discrete Algorithms, 2001. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  22. M. Naor, B. Pinkas, and R. Sumner. Privacy preserving auctions and mechanism design. In EC, 1999. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  23. J. B. Nielsen. Extending oblivious transfers efficiently - how to get robustness almost for free. IACR Cryptology ePrint Archive, 2007.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  24. V. Nikolaenko, S. Ioannidis, U. Weinsberg, M. Joye, N. Taft, and D. Boneh. Privacy-preserving matrix factorization. In ACM SIGSAC Conference on Computer and Communications Security, CCS'13, 2013. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  25. P. Paillier. Public-key cryptosystems based on composite degree residuosity classes. In Advances in Cryptology - EUROCRYPT '99, International Conference on the Theory and Application of Cryptographic Techniques, 1999. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  26. B. Pinkas, T. Schneider, N. P. Smart, and S. C. Williams. Secure two-party computation is practical. In Advances in Cryptology - ASIACRYPT 2009, 15th International Conference on the Theory and Application of Cryptology and Information Security, 2009. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  27. M. O. Rabin. How to exchange secrets with oblivious transfer. Harvard University Technical Report 81, 1981.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  28. Y. Rahulamathavan, S. Veluru, R. C. Phan, J. A. Chambers, and M. Rajarajan. Privacy-preserving clinical decision support system using gaussian kernel-based classification. IEEE J. Biomedical and Health Informatics, 18, 2014.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  29. M. Upmanyu, A. M. Namboodiri, K. Srinathan, and C. V. Jawahar. Blind authentication: a secure crypto-biometric verification protocol. IEEE Transactions on Information Forensics and Security, 2010. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  30. D. J. Wu, T. Feng, M. Naehrig, and K. E. Lauter. Privately evaluating decision trees and random forests. IACR Cryptology ePrint Archive, 2015.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  31. A. C. Yao. Protocols for secure computations (extended abstract). In 23rd Annual Symposium on Foundations of Computer Science, 1982. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  32. A. C. Yao. How to generate and exchange secrets (extended abstract). In 27th Annual Symposium on Foundations of Computer Science, 1986. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library

Index Terms

  1. Boosting GSHADE Capabilities: New Applications and Security in Malicious Setting

          Recommendations

          Comments

          Login options

          Check if you have access through your login credentials or your institution to get full access on this article.

          Sign in
          • Published in

            cover image ACM Conferences
            SACMAT '16: Proceedings of the 21st ACM on Symposium on Access Control Models and Technologies
            June 2016
            248 pages
            ISBN:9781450338028
            DOI:10.1145/2914642

            Copyright © 2016 ACM

            Permission to make digital or hard copies of all or part of this work for personal or classroom use is granted without fee provided that copies are not made or distributed for profit or commercial advantage and that copies bear this notice and the full citation on the first page. Copyrights for components of this work owned by others than ACM must be honored. Abstracting with credit is permitted. To copy otherwise, or republish, to post on servers or to redistribute to lists, requires prior specific permission and/or a fee. Request permissions from [email protected]

            Publisher

            Association for Computing Machinery

            New York, NY, United States

            Publication History

            • Published: 6 June 2016

            Permissions

            Request permissions about this article.

            Request Permissions

            Check for updates

            Qualifiers

            • research-article

            Acceptance Rates

            SACMAT '16 Paper Acceptance Rate18of55submissions,33%Overall Acceptance Rate177of597submissions,30%

            Upcoming Conference

            SACMAT 2024

          PDF Format

          View or Download as a PDF file.

          PDF

          eReader

          View online with eReader.

          eReader