Secure two-party quantum evaluation of unitaries against specious adversaries

We describe how any two-party quantum computation, specified by a unitary which simultaneously acts on the registers of both parties, can be privately implemented against a quantum version of classical semi-honest adversaries that we call specious. Our construction requires two ideal functionalities to garantee privacy: a private SWAP between registers held by the two parties and a classical private AND-box equivalent to oblivious transfer. If the unitary to be evaluated is in the Clifford group then only one call to SWAP is required for privacy. On the other hand, any unitary not in the Clifford requires one call to an AND-box per R-gate in the circuit. Since SWAP is itself in the Clifford group, this functionality is universal for the private evaluation of any unitary in that group. SWAP can be built from a classical bit commitment scheme or an AND-box but an AND-box cannot be constructed from SWAP. It follows that unitaries in the Clifford group are to some extent the easy ones. We also show that SWAP cannot be implemented privately in the bare model

Secure Multiparty Computation with Partial Fairness

A protocol for computing a functionality is secure if an adversary in this protocol cannot cause more harm than in an ideal computation where parties give their inputs to a trusted party which returns the output of the functionality to all parties. In particular, in the ideal model such computation is fair -- all parties get the output. Cleve (STOC 1986) proved that, in general, fairness is not possible without an honest majority. To overcome this impossibility, Gordon and Katz (Eurocrypt 2010) suggested a relaxed definition -- 1/p-secure computation -- which guarantees partial fairness. For two parties, they construct 1/p-secure protocols for functionalities for which the size of either their domain or their range is polynomial (in the security parameter). Gordon and Katz ask whether their results can be extended to multiparty protocols. We study 1/p-secure protocols in the multiparty setting for general functionalities. Our main result is constructions of 1/p-secure protocols when the number of parties is constant provided that less than 2/3 of the parties are corrupt. Our protocols require that either (1) the functionality is deterministic and the size of the domain is polynomial (in the security parameter), or (2) the functionality can be randomized and the size of the range is polynomial. If the size of the domain is constant and the functionality is deterministic, then our protocol is efficient even when the number of parties is O(log log n) (where n is the security parameter). On the negative side, we show that when the number of parties is super-constant, 1/p-secure protocols are not possible when the size of the domain is polynomial

On the Efficiency of Classical and Quantum Secure Function Evaluation

We provide bounds on the efficiency of secure one-sided output two-party computation of arbitrary finite functions from trusted distributed randomness in the statistical case. From these results we derive bounds on the efficiency of protocols that use different variants of OT as a black-box. When applied to implementations of OT, these bounds generalize most known results to the statistical case. Our results hold in particular for transformations between a finite number of primitives and for any error. In the second part we study the efficiency of quantum protocols implementing OT. While most classical lower bounds for perfectly secure reductions of OT to distributed randomness still hold in the quantum setting, we present a statistically secure protocol that violates these bounds by an arbitrarily large factor. We then prove a weaker lower bound that does hold in the statistical quantum setting and implies that even quantum protocols cannot extend OT. Finally, we present two lower bounds for reductions of OT to commitments and a protocol based on string commitments that is optimal with respect to both of these bounds

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

Multi-party Quantum Computation

We investigate definitions of and protocols for multi-party quantum computing in the scenario where the secret data are quantum systems. We work in the quantum information-theoretic model, where no assumptions are made on the computational power of the adversary. For the slightly weaker task of verifiable quantum secret sharing, we give a protocol which tolerates any t < n/4 cheating parties (out of n). This is shown to be optimal. We use this new tool to establish that any multi-party quantum computation can be securely performed as long as the number of dishonest players is less than n/6.Comment: Masters Thesis. Based on Joint work with Claude Crepeau and Daniel Gottesman. Full version is in preparatio

New Notions of Security: Achieving Universal Composability without Trusted Setup

We propose a modification to the framework of Universally Composable (UC) security [3]. Our new notion, involves comparing the protocol executions with an ideal execution involving ideal functionalities (just as in UC-security), but allowing the environment and adversary access to some super-polynomial computational power. We argue the meaningfulness of the new notion, which in particular subsumes many of the traditional notions of security. We generalize the Universal Composition theorem of [3] to the new setting. Then under new computational assumptions, we realize secure multi-party computation (for static adversaries) without a common reference string or any other set-up assumptions, in the new framework. This is known to be impossible under the UC framework.