Paper detail

Scalable Mechanisms for Rational Secret Sharing

We consider the classical secret sharing problem in the case where all agents are selfish but rational. In recent work, Kol and Naor show that, when there are two players, in the non-simultaneous communication model, i.e. when rushing is possible, there is no Nash equilibrium that ensures both players learn the secret. However, they describe a mechanism for this problem, for any number of players, that is an epsilon-Nash equilibrium, in that no player can gain more than epsilon utility by deviating from it. Unfortunately, the Kol and Naor mechanism, and, to the best of our knowledge, all previous mechanisms for this problem require each agent to send O(n) messages in expectation, where n is the number of agents. This may be problematic for some applications of rational secret sharing such as secure multi-party computation and simulation of a mediator. We address this issue by describing mechanisms for rational secret sharing that are designed for large n. Both of our results hold for n > 2, and are Nash equilbria, rather than just epsilon-Nash equilbria. Our first result is a mechanism for n-out-of-n rational secret sharing that is scalable in the sense that it requires each agent to send only an expected O(log n) bits. Moreover, the latency of this mechanism is O(log n) in expectation, compared to O(n) expected latency for the Kol and Naor result. Our second result is a mechanism for a relaxed variant of rational m-out-of-n secret sharing where m = Theta(n). It requires each processor to send O(log n) bits and has O(log n) latency. Both of our mechanisms are non-cryptographic, and are not susceptible to backwards induction.

preprint2012arXivOpen access
0citations
0reviews
0saves
Nocode
Nodataset
0institutions

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 graph slice

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.