Paper detail

Non-Malleable Coding Against Bit-wise and Split-State Tampering

Non-malleable coding, introduced by Dziembowski, Pietrzak and Wichs (ICS 2010), aims for protecting the integrity of information against tampering attacks in situations where error-detection is impossible. Intuitively, information encoded by a non-malleable code either decodes to the original message or, in presence of any tampering, to an unrelated message. Dziembowski et al. show existence of non-malleable codes for any class of tampering functions of bounded size. We consider constructions of coding schemes against two well-studied classes of tampering functions: bit-wise tampering functions (where the adversary tampers each bit of the encoding independently) and split-state adversaries (where two independent adversaries arbitrarily tamper each half of the encoded sequence). 1. For bit-tampering, we obtain explicit and efficiently encodable and decodable codes of length $n$ achieving rate $1-o(1)$ and error (security) $\exp(-\tildeΩ(n^{1/7}))$. We improve the error to $\exp(-\tildeΩ(n))$ at the cost of making the construction Monte Carlo with success probability $1-\exp(-Ω(n))$. Previously, the best known construction of bit-tampering codes was the Monte Carlo construction of Dziembowski et al. (ICS 2010) achieving rate ~.1887. 2. We initiate the study of seedless non-malleable extractors as a variation of non-malleable extractors introduced by Dodis and Wichs (STOC 2009). We show that construction of non-malleable codes for the split-state model reduces to construction of non-malleable two-source extractors. We prove existence of such extractors, which implies that codes obtained from our reduction can achieve rates arbitrarily close to 1/5 and exponentially small error. Currently, the best known explicit construction of split-state coding schemes is due to Aggarwal, Dodis and Lovett (ECCC TR13-081) which only achieves vanishing (polynomially small) rate.

preprint2014arXivOpen access

Signal facts

What is known right now

Open access2 authors4 topics

Next steps

Decide what to do with this paper

Use like or dislike for the fast social read. The more specific scholarly feedback stays available below when needed.

Log in to curate

Reading frame

Keep the important context close to the paper

Keep the important signals around this paper in one place: votes, save state, collection context, reviews and the metadata you need before deciding what to do next.

Institutions

Add specific reaction

Move through the context

Research map

Open full explorer

Move through nearby people, institutions, topics and adjacent work without leaving the paper page.

Building this map preview

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

Structured reviews

0 review(s)

ContributeLeave structured feedbackUse the review template when you have a concrete strength, concern or method question.Open review form

No structured reviews yet. High-signal critique starts here.

Work discussion

0 comment(s)

DiscussAdd a high-signal commentKeep quick notes, caveats and replication pointers separate from formal reviews.Open comment form

No discussion yet. The first strong comment sets the tone.