Reveal trait and its implementations for ProtocolContext
#223
Conversation
This file contains bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
Another step to make sort protocol support both semi-honest and malicious security. In semi-honest setting, `CheckZero` and `ConvertShares` will use semi-honest reveal with a cost of 1 multiplication. Malicious reveal currently has a cost of 2 multiplications and will be used only for malicious setting. This change leverages recently stabilized GAT (https://blog.rust-lang.org/2022/10/28/gats-stabilization.html). If we like this implementation, `SecureMul` will be changed accordingly.abilized GAT (https://blog.rust-lang.org/2022/10/28/gats-stabilization.html). If we like this implementation, `SecureMul` will be changed accordingly.
It drops `SecurityValidator` so it is not really that useful. Reveal does not care, so it can use it
src/test_fixture/sharing.rs
Outdated
| share(input, rng) | ||
| .iter() | ||
| .enumerate() | ||
| .map(|(i, share)| MaliciousReplicated::new(*share, r[i])) |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
I don’t think this is right. The second argument should be a sharing of input times r. This appears be be just r.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
I think that you want:
let r = validate_and_reconstruct((r[0], r[1], r[2]));
let rx = r * input;
zip(share(input, rng), share(rx, rng))
.map(|(x, rx)| MaliciousReplicated::new(*x, *rx))
.collect::<Vec<_>>()
.try_into()
.unwrap()There was a problem hiding this comment.
yep that was a bug. I decided to generate r inside share_malicious given that I have access to PRNG there. Lmk if that is not ergonomic (we could always reconstruct
benjaminsavage
approved these changes
Nov 15, 2022
src/test_fixture/sharing.rs
Outdated
| .iter() | ||
| .zip(share(rx, rng)) | ||
| .map(|(x, rx)| MaliciousReplicated::new(*x, rx)) | ||
| // TODO: each_ref when stable |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Does each_ref() work with zip?
There was a problem hiding this comment.
it should work if array::zip is stable rust-lang/rust#80094. I'll mention both in the todo
akoshelev
force-pushed
the
reveal-trait
branch
from
3384425 to
6dd9b4b
Compare
|
sorry had to force push as I screwed up during merge and it is quite painful to do it again :( |
martinthomson
approved these changes
Nov 15, 2022
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.
Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.
Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.
You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.
Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.
This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.
Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.
Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.
Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
Another step to make sort protocol support both semi-honest and malicious security.
In semi-honest setting,
CheckZeroandConvertShareswill use semi-honest reveal with a cost of 1 multiplication. Malicious reveal currently has a cost of 2 multiplications and will be used only for malicious setting.This change leverages recently stabilized GAT.
If we like this implementation,I tried it and I don't think it works for multiplicationSecureMulwill be changed accordingly.