Demo Data from VLDB 2026 / reviewers in the wild / expert
Iddo Bentov
dblp:24/508
· DBLP profile ↗
15ranked-venue papers
3as first author
1since 2021 · last 2024
—ORCID · none
Domains — the database's venue-derived domains; a paper can count in several
Security and privacy · 13 · 3 first-author · 1 since 2021Applied, interdisciplinary, general and emerging computing · 2Artificial intelligence and machine learning · 1Theory of computation · 1
Expertise — from the expertise taxonomy: the topics of the expert's papers under the CCF categories. A weight counts papers with recency: 1 for a paper about the topic, 0.3 when the topic is its context, halved every five years.
| Network and information security
10 papers |
Cryptographic protocols and secure computation · 47% Blockchain and cryptocurrency security · 46% Hardware security and side channels · 7% | |
| Theoretical computer science
2 papers |
Coding theory · 72% Algorithmic game theory and mechanism design · 28% |
Topics — the 16 heaviest of 19, each with the papers that count most for it
| Topic | Weight | Papers | Last | Evidence papers |
|---|---|---|---|---|
Cryptographic protocols and secure computation
secure multiparty computation |
0.5 | 2 | 2017 | Instantaneous Decentralized Poker · ASIACRYPT (2) 2017 How to Use Bitcoin to Play Decentralized Poker · CCS 2015 |
Blockchain and cryptocurrency security › decentralized finance
decentralized exchange |
0.4 | 1 | 2020 | Flash Boys 2.0: Frontrunning in Decentralized Exchanges, Miner Extractable Value, and Consensus Instability · SP 2020 |
Blockchain and cryptocurrency security › maximal extractable value
frontrunning |
0.4 | 1 | 2020 | Flash Boys 2.0: Frontrunning in Decentralized Exchanges, Miner Extractable Value, and Consensus Instability · SP 2020 |
Blockchain and cryptocurrency security
maximal extractable value |
0.4 | 1 | 2020 | Flash Boys 2.0: Frontrunning in Decentralized Exchanges, Miner Extractable Value, and Consensus Instability · SP 2020 |
Blockchain and cryptocurrency security › blockchain interoperability
cross-chain exchange |
0.4 | 1 | 2019 | Tesseract: Real-Time Cryptocurrency Exchange Using Trusted Hardware · CCS 2019 |
Blockchain and cryptocurrency security
cryptocurrency exchange |
0.4 | 1 | 2019 | Tesseract: Real-Time Cryptocurrency Exchange Using Trusted Hardware · CCS 2019 |
Hardware security and side channels
trusted execution environments |
0.4 | 1 | 2019 | Tesseract: Real-Time Cryptocurrency Exchange Using Trusted Hardware · CCS 2019 |
Cryptographic protocols and secure computation › proof systems
zero-knowledge proofs |
0.4 | 1 | 2019 | Scalable Zero Knowledge with No Trusted Setup · CRYPTO (3) 2019 |
Cryptographic protocols and secure computation › proof systems
interactive oracle proofs |
0.3 | 1 | 2018 | Fast Reed-Solomon Interactive Oracle Proofs of Proximity · ICALP 2018 |
Coding theory › error-correcting codes
reed-solomon codes |
0.3 | 1 | 2018 | Fast Reed-Solomon Interactive Oracle Proofs of Proximity · ICALP 2018 |
Cryptographic protocols and secure computation › secure multiparty computation
mental poker |
0.3 | 1 | 2017 | Instantaneous Decentralized Poker · ASIACRYPT (2) 2017 |
Cryptographic protocols and secure computation › proof systems
probabilistically checkable proofs |
0.3 | 1 | 2017 | Computational Integrity with a Public Random String from Quasi-Linear PCPs · EUROCRYPT (3) 2017 |
Cryptographic protocols and secure computation
verifiable computation |
0.3 | 1 | 2017 | Computational Integrity with a Public Random String from Quasi-Linear PCPs · EUROCRYPT (3) 2017 |
Cryptographic protocols and secure computation
fair exchange |
0.2 | 1 | 2014 | How to Use Bitcoin to Design Fair Protocols · CRYPTO (2) 2014 |
Blockchain and cryptocurrency security
smart contract |
0.1 | 1 | 2019 | Tesseract: Real-Time Cryptocurrency Exchange Using Trusted Hardware · CCS 2019 |
Blockchain and cryptocurrency security › electronic cash
bitcoin |
0.1 | 1 | 2016 | Amortizing Secure Computation with Penalties · CCS 2016 |
Methods — techniques the papers use, named apart from their topics
game-theoretic modeling · 0.9empirical measurement · 0.9claim-or-refund transaction · 0.5trusted execution environment · 0.4all-or-nothing fairness · 0.4quasi-linear PCPs · 0.3hybrid model · 0.2dropout tolerance · 0.2monetary penalty · 0.2ideal functionality · 0.2
| Year | Publication | Venue | Position |
|---|---|---|---|
| 2024 | GoAT: File Geolocation via Anchor Timestamping
Sai Krishna Deepak Maram, Mahimna Kelkar, Iddo Bentov, Ari Juels |
FC (2) | 3 |
| 2020 | Flash Boys 2.0: Frontrunning in Decentralized Exchanges, Miner Extractable Value, and Consensus InstabilityabstractBlockchains, and specifically smart contracts, have promised to create fair and transparent trading ecosystems.Unfortunately, we show that this promise has not been met. We document and quantify the widespread and rising deployment of arbitrage bots in blockchain systems, specifically in decentralized exchanges (or "DEXes"). Like high-frequency traders on Wall Street, these bots exploit inefficiencies in DEXes, paying high transaction fees and optimizing network latency to frontrun, i.e., anticipate and exploit, ordinary users' DEX trades.We study the breadth of DEX arbitrage bots in a subset of transactions that yield quantifiable revenue to these bots. We also study bots' profit-making strategies, with a focus on blockchain-specific elements. We observe bots engage in what we call priority gas auctions (PGAs), competitively bidding up transaction fees in order to obtain priority ordering, i.e., early block position and execution, for their transactions. PGAs present an interesting and complex new continuous-time, partial-information, game-theoretic model that we formalize and study. We release an interactive web portal, frontrun.me, to provide the community with real-time data on PGAs. We additionally show that high fees paid for priority transaction ordering poses a systemic risk to consensus-layer security. We explain that such fees are just one form of a general phenomenon in DEXes and beyond-what we call miner extractable value (MEV)-that poses concrete, measurable, consensus-layer security risks. We show empirically that MEV poses a realistic threat to Ethereum today. Our work highlights the large, complex risks created by transaction-ordering dependencies in smart contracts and the ways in which traditional forms of financial-market exploitation are adapting to and penetrating blockchain economies. Philip Daian, Steven Goldfeder, Tyler Kell, Yunqi Li 0002, Xueyuan Zhao, Iddo Bentov, Lorenz Breidenbach, Ari Juels |
SP | 6 |
| 2019 | Pisa: Arbitration Outsourcing for State ChannelsabstractState channels are a leading approach for improving the scalability of blockchains and cryptocurrencies. They allow a group of distrustful parties to optimistically execute an application-defined program amongst themselves, while the blockchain serves as a backstop in case of a dispute or abort. This effectively bypasses the congestion, fees and performance constraints of the underlying blockchain in the typical case. However, state channels introduce a new and undesirable assumption that a party must remain online and synchronised with the blockchain at all times to defend against execution fork attacks. An execution fork can revert a state channel's history, potentially causing financial damage to a party that is innocent except for having crashed. To provide security even to parties that may go offline for an extended period of time, we present Pisa, the first protocol to propose an accountable third party who can be hired by parties to cancel execution forks on their behalf. To evaluate Pisa, we provide a proof-of-concept implementation for a simplified Sprites and we demonstrate that it is cost-efficient to deploy on the Ethereum network. Patrick McCorry, Surya Bakshi, Iddo Bentov, Sarah Meiklejohn, Andrew Miller 0001 |
AFT | 3 |
| 2019 | Paralysis Proofs: Secure Dynamic Access Structures for Cryptocurrency Custody and MoreabstractThe growing adoption of digital assets---including but not limited to cryptocurrencies, tokens, and even identities---calls for secure and robust digital assets custody. A common way to distribute the ownership of a digital asset is (M, N)-threshold access structures. However, traditional access structures leave users with a painful choice. Setting M = N seems attractive as it offers maximum resistance to share compromise, but it also causes maximum brittleness: A single lost share renders the asset permanently frozen, inducing paralysis. Lowering M improves availability, but degrades security. Fan Zhang 0022, Philip Daian, Iddo Bentov, Ian Miers, Ari Juels |
AFT | 3 |
| 2019 | Tesseract: Real-Time Cryptocurrency Exchange Using Trusted HardwareabstractWe propose Tesseract, a secure real-time cryptocurrency exchange service. Existing centralized exchange designs are vulnerable to theft of funds, while decentralized exchanges cannot offer real-time cross-chain trades. All currently deployed exchanges are also vulnerable to frontrunning attacks. Tesseract overcomes these flaws and achieves a best-of-both-worlds design by using a trusted execution environment. The task of committing the recent trade data to independent cryptocurrency systems presents an all-or-nothing fairness problem, to which we present ideal theoretical solutions, as well as practical solutions. Tesseract supports not only real-time cross-chain cryptocurrency trades, but also secure tokenization of assets pegged to cryptocurrencies. For instance, Tesseract-tokenized bitcoins can circulate on the Ethereum blockchain for use in smart contracts. We provide a demo implementation of Tesseract that supports Bitcoin, Ethereum, and similar cryptocurrencies. Iddo Bentov, Yan Ji 0001, Fan Zhang 0022, Lorenz Breidenbach, Philip Daian, Ari Juels |
CCS | 1 |
| 2019 | Scalable Zero Knowledge with No Trusted Setup
Eli Ben-Sasson, Iddo Bentov, Yinon Horesh, Michael Riabzev |
CRYPTO (3) | 2 |
| 2018 | Obscuro: A Bitcoin Mixer using Trusted Execution EnvironmentsabstractBitcoin provides only pseudo-anonymous transactions, which can be exploited to link payers and payees -- defeating the goal of anonymous payments. To thwart such attacks, several Bitcoin mixers have been proposed, with the objective of providing unlinkability between payers and payees. However, existing Bitcoin mixers can be regarded as either insecure or inefficient. Muoi Tran, Loi Luu, Min Suk Kang, Iddo Bentov, Prateek Saxena |
ACSAC | 4 |
| 2018 | Fast Reed-Solomon Interactive Oracle Proofs of ProximityabstractThe family of Reed-Solomon (RS) codes plays a prominent role in the construction of quasilinear probabilistically checkable proofs (PCPs) and interactive oracle proofs (IOPs) with perfect zero knowledge and polylogarithmic verifiers. The large concrete computational complexity required to prove membership in RS codes is one of the biggest obstacles to deploying such PCP/IOP systems in practice. To advance on this problem we present a new interactive oracle proof of proximity (IOPP) for RS codes; we call it the Fast RS IOPP (FRI) because (i) it resembles the ubiquitous Fast Fourier Transform (FFT) and (ii) the arithmetic complexity of its prover is strictly linear and that of the verifier is strictly logarithmic (in comparison, FFT arithmetic complexity is quasi-linear but not strictly linear). Prior RS IOPPs and PCPs of proximity (PCPPs) required super-linear proving time even for polynomially large query complexity. For codes of block-length N, the arithmetic complexity of the (interactive) FRI prover is less than 6 * N, while the (interactive) FRI verifier has arithmetic complexity <= 21 * log N, query complexity 2 * log N and constant soundness - words that are delta-far from the code are rejected with probability min{delta * (1-o(1)),delta_0} where delta_0 is a positive constant that depends mainly on the code rate. The particular combination of query complexity and soundness obtained by FRI is better than that of the quasilinear PCPP of [Ben-Sasson and Sudan, SICOMP 2008], even with the tighter soundness analysis of [Ben-Sasson et al., STOC 2013; ECCC 2016]; consequently, FRI is likely to facilitate better concretely efficient zero knowledge proof and argument systems. Previous concretely efficient PCPPs and IOPPs suffered a constant multiplicative factor loss in soundness with each round of "proof composition" and thus used at most O(log log N) rounds. We show that when delta is smaller than the unique decoding radius of the code, FRI suffers only a negligible additive loss in soundness. This observation allows us to increase the number of "proof composition" rounds to Theta(log N) and thereby reduce prover and verifier running time for fixed soundness. Eli Ben-Sasson, Iddo Bentov, Yinon Horesh, Michael Riabzev |
ICALP | 2 |
| 2017 | Instantaneous Decentralized Poker
Iddo Bentov, Ranjit Kumaresan, Andrew Miller 0001 |
ASIACRYPT (2) | 1 |
| 2017 | Computational Integrity with a Public Random String from Quasi-Linear PCPs
Eli Ben-Sasson, Iddo Bentov, Alessandro Chiesa, Ariel Gabizon, Daniel Genkin, Matan Hamilis, Evgenya Pergament, Michael Riabzev, Mark Silberstein, Eran Tromer, Madars Virza |
EUROCRYPT (3) | 2 |
| 2016 | Amortizing Secure Computation with PenaltiesabstractMotivated by the impossibility of achieving fairness in secure computation [Cleve, STOC 1986], recent works study a model of fairness in which an adversarial party that aborts on receiving output is forced to pay a mutually predefined monetary penalty to every other party that did not receive the output. These works show how to design protocols for secure computation with penalties that guarantees that either fairness is guaranteed or that each honest party obtains a monetary penalty from the adversary. Protocols for this task are typically designed in an hybrid model where parties have access to a "claim-or-refund" transaction functionality denote FCR*. Ranjit Kumaresan, Iddo Bentov |
CCS | 2 |
| 2015 | How to Use Bitcoin to Play Decentralized PokerabstractBack and Bentov (arXiv 2014) and Andrychowicz et al. (Security and Privacy 2014) introduced techniques to perform secure multiparty computations on Bitcoin. Among other things, these works constructed lottery protocols that ensure that any party that aborts after learning the outcome pays a monetary penalty to all other parties. Following this, Andrychowicz et al. (Bitcoin Workshop 2014) and concurrently Bentov and Kumaresan (Crypto 2014) extended the solution to arbitrary secure function evaluation while guaranteeing fairness in the following sense: any party that aborts after learning the output pays a monetary penalty to all parties that did not learn the output. Andrychowicz et al. (Bitcoin Workshop 2014) also suggested extending to scenarios where parties receive a payoff according to the output of a secure function evaluation, and outlined a 2-party protocol for the same that in addition satisfies the notion of fairness described above. In this work, we formalize, generalize, and construct multiparty protocols for the primitive suggested by Andrychowicz et al. We call this primitive secure cash distribution with penalties. Our formulation of secure cash distribution with penalties poses it as a multistage reactive functionality (i.e., more general than secure function evaluation) that provides a way to securely implement smart contracts in a decentralized setting, and consequently suffices to capture a wide variety of stateful computations involving data and/or money, such as decentralized auctions, market, and games such as poker, etc. Our protocol realizing secure cash distribution with penalties works in a hybrid model where parties have access to a claim-or-refund transaction functionality FCR}* which can be efficiently realized in (a variant of) Bitcoin, and is otherwise independent of the Bitcoin ecosystem. We emphasize that our protocol is dropout-tolerant in the sense that any party that drops out during the protocol is forced to pay a monetary penalty to all other parties. Our formalization and construction generalize both secure computation with penalties of Bentov and Kumaresan (Crypto 2014), and secure lottery with penalties of Andrychowicz et al. (Security and Privacy 2014). Ranjit Kumaresan, Tal Moran, Iddo Bentov |
CCS | 3 |
| 2014 | How to Use Bitcoin to Incentivize Correct ComputationsabstractWe study a model of incentivizing correct computations in a variety of cryptographic tasks. For each of these tasks we propose a formal model and design protocols satisfying our model's constraints in a hybrid model where parties have access to special ideal functionalities that enable monetary transactions. We summarize our results: Ranjit Kumaresan, Iddo Bentov |
CCS | 2 |
| 2014 | How to Use Bitcoin to Design Fair Protocols
Iddo Bentov, Ranjit Kumaresan |
CRYPTO (2) | 1 |
| 2006 | On Exact Learning from Random Walk
Nader H. Bshouty, Iddo Bentov |
ALT | 2 |