252
v1v2v3 (latest)

Channels of Small Log-Ratio Leakage and Characterization of Two-Party Differentially Private Computation

IACR Cryptology ePrint Archive (IACR ePrint), 2019
Abstract

Consider a PPT two-party protocol π=(A,B)\pi=(A,B) in which the parties get no private inputs and obtain outputs OA,OB{0,1}O^A,O^B\in \{0,1\}, and let VAV^A and VBV^B denote the parties' individual views. Protocol π\pi has α\alpha-agreement if Pr[OA=OB]=1/2+αPr[O^A=O^B]=1/2+\alpha. The leakage of π\pi is the amount of information a party obtains about the event {OA=OB}\{O^A=O^B\}; that is, the leakage ϵ\epsilon is the maximum, over P{A,B}P\in\{A,B\}, of the distance between VPOA=OBV^P|OA=OB and VPOAOBV^P|OA\neq OB. Typically, this distance is measured in statistical distance, or, in the computational setting, in computational indistinguishability. For this choice, Wullschleger [TCC 09] showed that if α>>ϵ\alpha>>\epsilon then the protocol can be transformed into an OT protocol. We consider measuring the protocol leakage by the log-ratio distance (which was popularized by its use in the differential privacy framework). The log-ratio distance between X,Y over domain \Omega is the minimal ϵ>0\epsilon>0 for which, for every vΩv\in\Omega, log(Pr[X=v]/Pr[Y=v])[ϵ,ϵ]log(Pr[X=v]/Pr[Y=v])\in [-\epsilon,\epsilon]. In the computational setting, we use computational indistinguishability from having log-ratio distance ϵ\epsilon. We show that a protocol with (noticeable) accuracy αΩ(ϵ2)\alpha\in\Omega(\epsilon^2) can be transformed into an OT protocol (note that this allows ϵ>>α\epsilon>>\alpha). We complete the picture, in this respect, showing that a protocol with αo(ϵ2)\alpha\in o(\epsilon^2) does not necessarily imply OT. Our results hold for both the information theoretic and the computational settings, and can be viewed as a "fine grained" approach to "weak OT amplification". We then use the above result to fully characterize the complexity of differentially private two-party computation for the XOR function, answering the open question put by Goyal, Khurana, Mironov, Pandey, and Sahai [ICALP 16] and Haitner, Nissim, Omri, Shaltiel, and Silbak [FOCS 18].

View on arXiv
Comments on this paper