Overview of Workshop Goals and RFI Responses

Emily Shen

SPAR-MPC Workshop28 May 2014

SPAR-MPC - 2ES 05/28/14

SPAR-MPC Vision

• Multi-party computation (MPC) protocol generation tools:– Input: description of computation, security requirements,

application parameters– Output: efficient, secure MPC protocols tailored to application

• Properties of tools:– Accessible to end users– Can achieve many points in security vs. efficiency space– Can generate new, efficient protocols quickly

SPAR-MPC - 3ES 05/28/14

SPAR-MPC Workshop

10 Feb: Request for Information (RFI)

31 Mar: IARPA received 21 responses

15 Apr: IARPA + MIT LL reviewed

responses

28-29 May: SPAR-MPC Workshop

Workshop objective: Discuss remaining questions to understand challenges and feasibility of potential SPAR-MPC directions

SPAR-MPC - 4ES 05/28/14

Workshop Goals

Understand challenges and approaches for:

1. Security vs. efficiency tradeoffs, including allowing leakage

2. Toolbox components, compilation, and composition

3. Program structures, problem decomposition and scoping

4. Metrics for progress and success

SPAR-MPC - 5ES 05/28/14

Workshop Goals

Understand challenges and approaches for:

1. Security vs. efficiency tradeoffs, including allowing leakage

2. Toolbox components, compilation, and composition

3. Program structures, problem decomposition and scoping

4. Metrics for progress and success

SPAR-MPC - 6ES 05/28/14

Security vs. Efficiency Tradeoffs

RFI response ideas:

• Leakage challenges

• Other security and functionality variations

Remaining questions:

• Further understand challenges of representing, reasoning about leakage and other relaxations

Breakout sessions:

• Group 1: User specification of application requirements

• Group 2: Crypto language for leakage

• Group 3: Translation between application and crypto requirements

• Group 4: Real-world implications of formal security properties

SPAR-MPC - 7ES 05/28/14

Security and Functionality Variations

• Adversaries (besides semi-honest and malicious)– Covert– Mobile– Rational– Non-coordinating

• Security properties (besides confidentiality and integrity)– Anonymity– Fairness– Limited information revealed by output– Graceful degradation of security

• Functionality relaxations: – Imperfect correctness, approximate computation– Restricted inputs

SPAR-MPC - 8ES 05/28/14

Workshop Goals

Understand challenges and approaches for:

1. Security vs. efficiency tradeoffs, including allowing leakage

2. Toolbox components, compilation, and composition

3. Program structures, problem decomposition and scoping

4. Metrics for progress and success

SPAR-MPC - 9ES 05/28/14

Toolbox Components, Compilation, and Composition

RFI responses ideas:

• Build and benchmark a library of MPC tools with common API

• Build new, complex protocols from building blocks

• Develop optimizing compiler

• Study composition and concurrency

Remaining questions:

• What would the components and API of MPC toolbox look like?

• What are the challenges of compilation and composition?

Breakout session:

• Group 5: Crypto toolbox components, compilation, and composition

SPAR-MPC - 10ES 05/28/14

Workshop Goals

Understand challenges and approaches for:

1. Security vs. efficiency tradeoffs, including allowing leakage

2. Toolbox components, compilation, and composition

3. Program structures, problem decomposition and scoping

4. Metrics for progress and success

SPAR-MPC - 11ES 05/28/14

Program Structure, Problem Decomposition and Scoping

RFI response ideas:

• MPC applications and protocols described by parameters of model of computation, security, and functionality

Remaining questions:

• What parameter subspaces are most appropriate and feasible to address?

• How to decompose the problem and structure SPAR-MPC program?

Breakout sessions:

• Group A: Crypto research risks/rewards

• Group B: User language/interface design risks/rewards

• Group C: Potential SPAR-MPC program structures

SPAR-MPC - 12ES 05/28/14

Workshop Goals

Understand challenges and approaches for:

1. Security vs. efficiency tradeoffs, including allowing leakage

2. Toolbox components, compilation, and composition

3. Program structures, problem decomposition and scoping

4. Metrics for progress and success

SPAR-MPC - 13ES 05/28/14

Metrics for Success and Progress

RFI response ideas:

• Use metrics for individual MPC protocols

• Benchmark library of MPC tools developed with common API

• Compare performance of MPC protocols with insecure computation

Remaining questions:

• Metrics for MPC protocol generation tools and overall research program

Breakout groups:

• Group D: Use cases and likely impact

• Group E: Metrics for success and progress

SPAR-MPC - 14ES 05/28/14

SPAR-MPC Breakout Agenda

Wednesday, 28 May

Numbered Breakout Sessions

1. User specification of application requirements

2. Crypto language for leakage

3. Translation between application and crypto requirements

4. Real-world implications of crypto properties

5. Crypto toolbox components, compilation, and composition

Thursday, 29 May

Lettered Breakout Sessions

A. Crypto research risks/rewards

B. User language/interface design risk/rewards

C. Potential SPAR-MPC program structures

D. Use cases and likely impact

E. Metrics for success and progress

SPAR-MPC - 15ES 05/28/14

Today’s Breakout Sessions

Wednesday, 28 May

Numbered Breakout Sessions

1.User specification of application requirements

2.Crypto language for leakage

3.Translation between application and crypto requirements

4.Real-world implications of crypto properties

5.Crypto toolbox components, compilation, and composition