Demonstration venue · read-only. Every page can be browsed; the buttons that would change it are switched off. Create an account to run TaxoReview on your own data. A simulation from public publication records: the people listed were not invited and did not agree to review.
? Tutorial for this page

Udi Peled

dblp:265/8779 · DBLP profile ↗
← Back
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

TopicWeightPapersLastEvidence papers
Cryptographic protocols and secure computation › adversarial model
adaptive corruption
0.412020
UC Non-Interactive, Proactive, Threshold ECDSA with Identifiable Aborts · CCS 2020
Cryptographic protocols and secure computation › secure multiparty computation › active security
identifiable abort
0.412020
UC Non-Interactive, Proactive, Threshold ECDSA with Identifiable Aborts · CCS 2020
Cryptographic protocols and secure computation › threshold cryptography
proactive security
0.412020
UC Non-Interactive, Proactive, Threshold ECDSA with Identifiable Aborts · CCS 2020
Cryptographic primitives and cryptanalysis › public-key cryptography › digital signatures › threshold signature
threshold ECDSA
0.412020
UC Non-Interactive, Proactive, Threshold ECDSA with Identifiable Aborts · CCS 2020
Cryptographic primitives and cryptanalysis › public-key cryptography › digital signatures
threshold signature
0.412020
UC Non-Interactive, Proactive, Threshold ECDSA with Identifiable Aborts · CCS 2020
Cryptographic protocols and secure computation › composable security
universally composable security
0.412020
UC Non-Interactive, Proactive, Threshold ECDSA with Identifiable Aborts · CCS 2020
Blockchain and cryptocurrency security
cryptocurrency wallet
0.112020
UC Non-Interactive, Proactive, Threshold ECDSA with Identifiable Aborts · CCS 2020
Blockchain and cryptocurrency security › cryptocurrency wallet
threshold wallet
0.112020
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
YearPublicationVenuePosition
2020 UC Non-Interactive, Proactive, Threshold ECDSA with Identifiable Aborts
abstract
Building 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
CCS5