Demo Data from EDBT 2026 / reviewers in the wild / expert
Udi Peled
dblp:265/8779
· DBLP profile ↗
1ranked-venue papers
0as first author
0since 2021 · last 2020
—ORCID · none
Domains — the database's venue-derived domains; a paper can count in several
Security and privacy · 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
1 paper |
Cryptographic protocols and secure computation · 61% Cryptographic primitives and cryptanalysis · 30% Blockchain and cryptocurrency security · 9% |
Topics — the 8 heaviest of 9, each with the papers that count most for it
| Topic | Weight | Papers | Last | Evidence papers |
|---|---|---|---|---|
Cryptographic protocols and secure computation › adversarial model
adaptive corruption |
0.4 | 1 | 2020 | UC Non-Interactive, Proactive, Threshold ECDSA with Identifiable Aborts · CCS 2020 |
Cryptographic protocols and secure computation › secure multiparty computation › active security
identifiable abort |
0.4 | 1 | 2020 | UC Non-Interactive, Proactive, Threshold ECDSA with Identifiable Aborts · CCS 2020 |
Cryptographic protocols and secure computation › threshold cryptography
proactive security |
0.4 | 1 | 2020 | UC Non-Interactive, Proactive, Threshold ECDSA with Identifiable Aborts · CCS 2020 |
Cryptographic primitives and cryptanalysis › public-key cryptography › digital signatures › threshold signature
threshold ECDSA |
0.4 | 1 | 2020 | UC Non-Interactive, Proactive, Threshold ECDSA with Identifiable Aborts · CCS 2020 |
Cryptographic primitives and cryptanalysis › public-key cryptography › digital signatures
threshold signature |
0.4 | 1 | 2020 | UC Non-Interactive, Proactive, Threshold ECDSA with Identifiable Aborts · CCS 2020 |
Cryptographic protocols and secure computation › composable security
universally composable security |
0.4 | 1 | 2020 | UC Non-Interactive, Proactive, Threshold ECDSA with Identifiable Aborts · CCS 2020 |
Blockchain and cryptocurrency security
cryptocurrency wallet |
0.1 | 1 | 2020 | UC Non-Interactive, Proactive, Threshold ECDSA with Identifiable Aborts · CCS 2020 |
Blockchain and cryptocurrency security › cryptocurrency wallet
threshold wallet |
0.1 | 1 | 2020 | UC Non-Interactive, Proactive, Threshold ECDSA with Identifiable Aborts · CCS 2020 |
Methods — techniques the papers use, named apart from their topics
paillier encryption · 0.4non-interactive protocol · 0.4Strong RSA · 0.4DDH · 0.4
| Year | Publication | Venue | Position |
|---|---|---|---|
| 2020 | UC Non-Interactive, Proactive, Threshold ECDSA with Identifiable AbortsabstractBuilding on the Gennaro & Goldfeder and Lindell & Nof protocols (CCS '18), we present two threshold ECDSA protocols, for any number of signatories and any threshold, that improve as follows over the state of the art: -- For both protocols, only the last round requires knowledge of the message, and the other rounds can take place in a preprocessing stage, lending to a non-interactive threshold ECDSA protocol. -- Both protocols withstand adaptive corruption of signatories. Furthermore, they include a periodic refresh mechanism and offer full proactive security. -- Both protocols realize an ideal threshold signature functionality within the UC framework, in the global random oracle model, assuming Strong RSA, DDH, semantic security of the Paillier encryption, and a somewhat enhanced variant of existential unforgeability of ECDSA. -- Both protocols achieve accountability by identifying corrupted parties in case of failure to generate a valid signature. The two protocols are distinguished by the round-complexity and the identification process for detecting cheating parties. Namely: -- For the first protocol, signature generation takes only 4 rounds (down from the current state of the art of 8 rounds), but the identification process requires computation and communication that is quadratic in the number of parties. -- For the second protocol, the identification process requires computation and communication that is only linear in the number of parties, but signature generation takes 7 rounds. These properties (low latency, compatibility with cold-wallet architectures, proactive security, identifiable abort and composable security) make the two protocols ideal for threshold wallets for ECDSA-based cryptocurrencies. Ran Canetti, Rosario Gennaro, Steven Goldfeder, Nikolaos Makriyannis, Udi Peled |
CCS | 5 |