Adaptively Secure Coin-Flipping, Revisited

The full-information model was introduced by Ben-Or and Linial in 1985 to study collective coin-flipping: the problem of generating a common bounded-bias bit in a network of $n$ players with $t=t(n)$ faults. They showed that the majority protocol can tolerate $t=O(\sqrt n)$ adaptive corruptions, and conjectured that this is optimal in the adaptive setting. Lichtenstein, Linial, and Saks proved that the conjecture holds for protocols in which each player sends a single bit. Their result has been the main progress on the conjecture in the last 30 years. In this work we revisit this question and ask: what about protocols involving longer messages? Can increased communication allow for a larger fraction of faulty players? We introduce a model of strong adaptive corruptions, where in each round, the adversary sees all messages sent by honest parties and, based on the message content, decides whether to corrupt a party (and intercept his message) or not. We prove that any one-round coin-flipping protocol, regardless of message length, is secure against at most $\tilde{O}(\sqrt n)$ strong adaptive corruptions. Thus, increased message length does not help in this setting. We then shed light on the connection between adaptive and strongly adaptive adversaries, by proving that for any symmetric one-round coin-flipping protocol secure against $t$ adaptive corruptions, there is a symmetric one-round coin-flipping protocol secure against $t$ strongly adaptive corruptions. Returning to the standard adaptive model, we can now prove that any symmetric one-round protocol with arbitrarily long messages can tolerate at most $\tilde{O}(\sqrt n)$ adaptive corruptions. At the heart of our results lies a novel use of the Minimax Theorem and a new technique for converting any one-round secure protocol into a protocol with messages of $polylog(n)$ bits. This technique may be of independent interest

A Lower Bound for Adaptively-Secure Collective Coin-Flipping Protocols

In 1985, Ben-Or and Linial (Advances in Computing Research \u2789) introduced the collective coin-flipping problem, where n parties communicate via a single broadcast channel and wish to generate a common random bit in the presence of adaptive Byzantine corruptions. In this model, the adversary can decide to corrupt a party in the course of the protocol as a function of the messages seen so far. They showed that the majority protocol, in which each player sends a random bit and the output is the majority value, tolerates O(sqrt n) adaptive corruptions. They conjectured that this is optimal for such adversaries. We prove that the majority protocol is optimal (up to a poly-logarithmic factor) among all protocols in which each party sends a single, possibly long, message. Previously, such a lower bound was known for protocols in which parties are allowed to send only a single bit (Lichtenstein, Linial, and Saks, Combinatorica \u2789), or for symmetric protocols (Goldwasser, Kalai, and Park, ICALP \u2715)

On the Round Complexity of Randomized Byzantine Agreement

We prove lower bounds on the round complexity of randomized Byzantine agreement (BA) protocols, bounding the halting probability of such protocols after one and two rounds. In particular, we prove that: 1) BA protocols resilient against n/3 [resp., n/4] corruptions terminate (under attack) at the end of the first round with probability at most o(1) [resp., 1/2+ o(1)]. 2) BA protocols resilient against n/4 corruptions terminate at the end of the second round with probability at most 1-Theta(1). 3) For a large class of protocols (including all BA protocols used in practice) and under a plausible combinatorial conjecture, BA protocols resilient against n/3 [resp., n/4] corruptions terminate at the end of the second round with probability at most o(1) [resp., 1/2 + o(1)]. The above bounds hold even when the parties use a trusted setup phase, e.g., a public-key infrastructure (PKI). The third bound essentially matches the recent protocol of Micali (ITCS\u2717) that tolerates up to n/3 corruptions and terminates at the end of the third round with constant probability

Efficient Random Beacons with Adaptive Security for Ungrindable Blockchains

We describe and analyze a simple protocol for $n$ parties that implements a randomness beacon: a sequence of high entropy values, continuously emitted at regular intervals, with sub-linear communication per value. The algorithm can tolerate a $(1 - \epsilon)/2$ fraction of the $n$ players to be controlled by an adaptive adversary that may deviate arbitrarily from the protocol. The randomness mechanism relies on verifiable random functions (VRF), modeled as random functions, and effectively stretches an initial $\lambda$-bit seed to an arbitrarily long public sequence so that (i) with overwhelming probability in $k$--the security parameter--each beacon value has high min-entropy conditioned on the full history of the algorithm, and (ii) the total work and communication required per value is $O(k)$ cryptographic operations. The protocol can be directly applied to provide a qualitative improvement in the security of several proof-of-stake blockchain algorithms, rendering them safe from ``grinding\u27\u27 attacks

Optimally-secure Coin-tossing against a Byzantine Adversary

In their seminal work, Ben-Or and Linial (1985) introduced the full information model for collective coin-tossing protocols involving $n$ processors with unbounded computational power using a common broadcast channel for all their communications. The design and analysis of coin-tossing protocols in the full information model have close connections to diverse fields like extremal graph theory, randomness extraction, cryptographic protocol design, game theory, distributed protocols, and learning theory. Several works have focused on studying the asymptotically best attacks and optimal coin-tossing protocols in various adversarial settings. While one knows the characterization of the exact or asymptotically optimal protocols in some adversarial settings, for most adversarial settings, the optimal protocol characterization remains open. For the cases where the asymptotically optimal constructions are known, the exact constants or poly-logarithmic multiplicative factors involved are not entirely well-understood. In this work, we study $n$-processor coin-tossing protocols where every processor broadcasts an arbitrary-length message once. Note that, in this setting, which processor speaks and its message distribution may depend on the messages broadcast so far. An adaptive Byzantine adversary, based on the messages broadcast so far, can corrupt $k=1$ processor. A bias-$X$ coin-tossing protocol outputs 1 with probability $X$; 0 with probability $(1-X)$. For a coin-tossing protocol, its insecurity is the maximum change in the output distribution (in the statistical distance) that an adversarial strategy can cause. Our objective is to identify optimal bias-$X$ coin-tossing protocols with minimum insecurity, for every $X\in[0,1]$. Lichtenstein, Linial, and Saks (1989) studied bias-$X$ coin-tossing protocols in this adversarial model under the highly restrictive constraint that each party broadcasts an independent and uniformly random bit. The underlying message space is a well-behaved product space, and $X\in[0,1]$ can only be integer multiples of $1/2^n$, which is a discrete problem. The case where every processor broadcasts only an independent random bit admits simplifications, for example, the collective coin-tossing protocol must be monotone. Surprisingly, for this class of coin-tossing protocols, the objective of reducing an adversary’s ability to increase the expected output is equivalent to reducing an adversary’s ability to decrease the expected output. Building on these observations, Lichtenstein, Linial, and Saks proved that the threshold coin-tossing protocols are optimal for all $n$ and $k$. In a sequence of works, Goldwasser, Kalai, and Park (2015), Kalai, Komargodski, and Raz (2018), and (independent of our work) Haitner and Karidi-Heller (2020) prove that k=\mathcal{O}\left(\sqrt n\cdot \polylog{n}\right) corruptions suffice to fix the output of any bias-X coin-tossing protocol. These results consider parties who send arbitrary-length messages, and each processor has multiple turns to reveal its entire message. However, optimal protocols robust to a large number of corruptions do not have any apriori relation to the optimal protocol robust to $k=1$ corruption. Furthermore, to make an informed choice of employing a coin-tossing protocol in practice, for a fixed target tolerance of insecurity, one needs a precise characterization of the minimum insecurity achieved by these coin-tossing protocols. We rely on an inductive approach to constructing coin-tossing protocols to study a proxy potential function measuring the susceptibility of any bias-$X$ coin-tossing protocol to attacks in our adversarial model. Our technique is inherently constructive and yields protocols that minimize the potential function. It happens to be the case that threshold protocols minimize the potential function. We demonstrate that the insecurity of these threshold protocols is 2-approximate of the optimal protocol in our adversarial model. For any other $X\in[0,1]$ that threshold protocols cannot realize, we prove that an appropriate (convex) combination of the threshold protocols is a 4-approximation of the optimal protocol

Cornucopia: Distributed randomness beacons at scale

We propose Cornucopia, a distributed randomness beacon protocol combining accumulators and verifiable delay functions. Cornucopia extends the Unicorn protocol of Lenstra and Wesolowski, utilizing an accumulator to enable efficient verification by each participant that their randomness contribution has been included in the beacon output. The security of this construction reduces to a novel property of accumulators, insertion security. We first show that not all accumulators are insertion-secure. We then prove that common constructions (Merkle trees and RSA accumulators) are naturally insertion-secure. Finally, we give a generic transformation from any universal accumulator (supporting non-membership proofs) to an insertion-secure accumulator, albeit with an efficiency loss proportional to the security parameter

Round-Optimal Secure Two-Party Computation from Trapdoor Permutations

In this work we continue the study on the round complexity of secure two-party computation with black-box simulation. Katz and Ostrovsky in CRYPTO 2004 showed a 5 (optimal) round construction assuming trapdoor permutations for the general case where both players receive the output. They also proved that their result is round optimal. This lower bound has been recently revisited by Garg et al. in Eurocrypt 2016 where a 4 (optimal) round protocol is showed assuming a simultaneous message exchange channel. Unfortunately there is no instantiation of the protocol of Garg et al. under standard polynomial-time hardness assumptions. In this work we close the above gap by showing a 4 (optimal) round construction for secure two-party computation in the simultaneous message channel model with black-box simulation, assuming trapdoor permutations against polynomial-time adversaries. Our construction for secure two-party computation relies on a special 4-round protocol for oblivious transfer that nicely composes with other protocols in parallel. We define and construct such special oblivious transfer protocol from trapdoor permutations. This building block is clearly interesting on its own. Our construction also makes use of a recent advance on non-malleability: a delayed-input 4-round non-malleable zero knowledge argument