Researcher profile

Sameer Wagh

Sameer Wagh contributes to research discovery and scholarly infrastructure.

ResearcherAffiliation not importedOpen to collaborate

Trust snapshot

Quick read

Trust 13 - UnverifiedVerification L1Unclaimed author
2works
0followers
2topics
4close collaborators

Actions

Decide how to stay connected

Follow researcher0

Identity and collaboration

How to connect with this researcher

Claiming links this public author record to a researcher profile and unlocks direct collaboration workflows.

Log in to claim

Direct collaboration

Open a focused conversation when the fit is right

Claim this author entity first to unlock direct invitations.

Research graph

See the researcher in context

Open full explorer

Inspect adjacent work, topics, institutions and collaborators without jumping out to a separate graph page.

Building this graph slice

BZPEER is loading the nearby papers, people, topics and institutions for this page.

Published work

2 published item(s)

preprint2020arXiv

DP-Cryptography: Marrying Differential Privacy and Cryptography in Emerging Applications

Differential privacy (DP) has arisen as the state-of-the-art metric for quantifying individual privacy when sensitive data are analyzed, and it is starting to see practical deployment in organizations such as the US Census Bureau, Apple, Google, etc. There are two popular models for deploying differential privacy - standard differential privacy (SDP), where a trusted server aggregates all the data and runs the DP mechanisms, and local differential privacy (LDP), where each user perturbs their own data and perturbed data is analyzed. Due to security concerns arising from aggregating raw data at a single server, several real world deployments in industry have embraced the LDP model. However, systems based on the LDP model tend to have poor utility - "a gap" in the utility achieved as compared to systems based on the SDP model. In this work, we survey and synthesize emerging directions of research at the intersection of differential privacy and cryptography. First, we survey solutions that combine cryptographic primitives like secure computation and anonymous communication with differential privacy to give alternatives to the LDP model that avoid a trusted server as in SDP but close the gap in accuracy. These primitives introduce performance bottlenecks and necessitate efficient alternatives. Second, we synthesize work in an area we call "DP-Cryptography" - cryptographic primitives that are allowed to leak differentially private outputs. These primitives have orders of magnitude better performance than standard cryptographic primitives. DP-cryptographic primitives are perfectly suited for implementing alternatives to LDP, but are also applicable to scenarios where standard cryptographic primitives do not have practical implementations. Through this unique lens of research taxonomy, we survey ongoing research in these directions while also providing novel directions for future research.

preprint2020arXiv

FALCON: Honest-Majority Maliciously Secure Framework for Private Deep Learning

We propose Falcon, an end-to-end 3-party protocol for efficient private training and inference of large machine learning models. Falcon presents four main advantages - (i) It is highly expressive with support for high capacity networks such as VGG16 (ii) it supports batch normalization which is important for training complex networks such as AlexNet (iii) Falcon guarantees security with abort against malicious adversaries, assuming an honest majority (iv) Lastly, Falcon presents new theoretical insights for protocol design that make it highly efficient and allow it to outperform existing secure deep learning solutions. Compared to prior art for private inference, we are about 8x faster than SecureNN (PETS'19) on average and comparable to ABY3 (CCS'18). We are about 16-200x more communication efficient than either of these. For private training, we are about 6x faster than SecureNN, 4.4x faster than ABY3 and about 2-60x more communication efficient. Our experiments in the WAN setting show that over large networks and datasets, compute operations dominate the overall latency of MPC, as opposed to the communication.