Computer-aided proofs for multiparty computation with active security
This work addresses the need for correct and verifiable cryptographic protocols in applications like auctioning and secure teleconference, though it is incremental as it extends existing proof assistant methods to a new domain.
The paper tackled the problem of verifying security proofs for multiparty computation (MPC) protocols against malicious adversaries by using the EasyCrypt proof assistant, demonstrating for the first time that it can formalize secret sharing schemes and apply them to Maurer's MPC protocol for secure operations.
Secure multi-party computation (MPC) is a general cryptographic technique that allows distrusting parties to compute a function of their individual inputs, while only revealing the output of the function. It has found applications in areas such as auctioning, email filtering, and secure teleconference. Given its importance, it is crucial that the protocols are specified and implemented correctly. In the programming language community it has become good practice to use computer proof assistants to verify correctness proofs. In the field of cryptography, EasyCrypt is the state of the art proof assistant. It provides an embedded language for probabilistic programming, together with a specialized logic, embedded into an ambient general purpose higher-order logic. It allows us to conveniently express cryptographic properties. EasyCrypt has been used successfully on many applications, including public-key encryption, signatures, garbled circuits and differential privacy. Here we show for the first time that it can also be used to prove security of MPC against a malicious adversary. We formalize additive and replicated secret sharing schemes and apply them to Maurer's MPC protocol for secure addition and multiplication. Our method extends to general polynomial functions. We follow the insights from EasyCrypt that security proofs can be often be reduced to proofs about program equivalence, a topic that is well understood in the verification of programming languages. In particular, we show that in the passive case the non-interference-based definition is equivalent to a standard game-based security definition. For the active case we provide a new NI definition, which we call input independence.