A Tight Lower Bound on Adaptively Secure Full-Information Coin Flip

May 04, 2020 Β· Declared Dead Β· πŸ› IEEE Annual Symposium on Foundations of Computer Science

πŸ‘» CAUSE OF DEATH: Ghosted
No code link whatsoever

"No code URL or promise found in abstract"

Evidence collected by the PWNC Scanner

Authors Iftach Haitner, Yonatan Karidi-Heller arXiv ID 2005.01565 Category cs.CR: Cryptography & Security Citations 13 Venue IEEE Annual Symposium on Foundations of Computer Science Last Checked 3 months ago
Abstract
In a distributed coin-flipping protocol, Blum [ACM Transactions on Computer Systems '83], the parties try to output a common (close to) uniform bit, even when some adversarially chosen parties try to bias the common output. In an adaptively secure full-information coin flip, Ben-Or and Linial [FOCS '85], the parties communicate over a broadcast channel, and a computationally unbounded adversary can choose which parties to corrupt along the protocol execution. Ben-Or and Linial proved that the $n$-party majority protocol is resilient to $O(\sqrt{n})$ corruptions (ignoring poly-logarithmic factors), and conjectured this is a tight upper bound for any $n$-party protocol (of any round complexity). Their conjecture was proved to be correct for single-turn (each party sends a single message) single-bit (a message is one bit) protocols Lichtenstein, Linial and Saks [Combinatorica '89], symmetric protocols Goldwasser, Tauman Kalai and Park [ICALP '15], and recently for (arbitrary message length) single-turn protocols Tauman Kalai, Komargodski and Raz [DISC '18]. Yet, the question of many-turn protocols was left entirely open. In this work, we close the above gap, proving that no $n$-party protocol (of any round complexity) is resilient to $Ο‰(\sqrt{n})$ (adaptive) corruptions.
Community shame:
Not yet rated
Community Contributions

Found the code? Know the venue? Think something is wrong? Let us know!

πŸ“œ Similar Papers

In the same crypt β€” Cryptography & Security

Died the same way β€” πŸ‘» Ghosted