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

Steven Goldfeder

dblp:151/5205 · DBLP profile ↗
← Back
14ranked-venue papers
1as first author
1since 2021 · last 2021
—ORCID · none

Domains — the database's venue-derived domains; a paper can count in several

Security and privacy · 13 · 1 first-author · 1 since 2021Human-computer interaction and ubiquitous computing · 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
11 papers
Cryptographic protocols and secure computation · 45% Blockchain and cryptocurrency security · 28% Cryptographic primitives and cryptanalysis · 23%
Computer architecture, parallel and distributed computing, and storage systems
2 papers
Distributed systems · 100%

Topics — the 30 heaviest of 41, each with the papers that count most for it

TopicWeightPapersLastEvidence papers
Cryptographic protocols and secure computation
secure multiparty computation
0.822021
MPC-Friendly Symmetric Cryptography from Alternating Moduli: Candidates, Protocols, and Applications · CRYPTO (4) 2021
Fast Multiparty Threshold ECDSA with Fast Trustless Setup · CCS 2018
Cryptographic primitives and cryptanalysis › public-key cryptography › digital signatures
threshold signature
0.822020
UC Non-Interactive, Proactive, Threshold ECDSA with Identifiable Aborts · CCS 2020
Fast Multiparty Threshold ECDSA with Fast Trustless Setup · CCS 2018
Cryptographic protocols and secure computation › proof systems
zero-knowledge proofs
0.722020
DECO: Liberating Web Data Using Decentralized Oracles for TLS · CCS 2020
Post-Quantum Zero-Knowledge and Signatures from Symmetric-Key Primitives · CCS 2017
Cryptographic protocols and secure computation
threshold cryptography
0.722018
Threshold Cryptosystems from Threshold Fully Homomorphic Encryption · CRYPTO (1) 2018
Fast Multiparty Threshold ECDSA with Fast Trustless Setup · CCS 2018
Distributed systems
consensus
0.522020
Order-Fairness for Byzantine Consensus · CRYPTO (3) 2020
Arbitrum: Scalable, private smart contracts · USENIX Security Symposium 2018
Cryptographic primitives and cryptanalysis
symmetric cryptography
0.512021
MPC-Friendly Symmetric Cryptography from Alternating Moduli: Candidates, Protocols, and Applications · CRYPTO (4) 2021
Blockchain and cryptocurrency security
smart contract
0.522020
Arbitrum: Scalable, private smart contracts · USENIX Security Symposium 2018
DECO: Liberating Web Data Using Decentralized Oracles for TLS · CCS 2020
Cryptographic protocols and secure computation › adversarial model
adaptive corruption
0.412020
UC Non-Interactive, Proactive, Threshold ECDSA with Identifiable Aborts · CCS 2020
Blockchain and cryptocurrency security
blockchain analysis
0.412020
BlockSci: Design and applications of a blockchain analysis platform · USENIX Security Symposium 2020
Blockchain and cryptocurrency security › decentralized finance
decentralized exchange
0.412020
Flash Boys 2.0: Frontrunning in Decentralized Exchanges, Miner Extractable Value, and Consensus Instability · SP 2020
Blockchain and cryptocurrency security › blockchain oracle
decentralized oracle
0.412020
DECO: Liberating Web Data Using Decentralized Oracles for TLS · CCS 2020
Blockchain and cryptocurrency security › maximal extractable value
frontrunning
0.412020
Flash Boys 2.0: Frontrunning in Decentralized Exchanges, Miner Extractable Value, and Consensus Instability · SP 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
Blockchain and cryptocurrency security
maximal extractable value
0.412020
Flash Boys 2.0: Frontrunning in Decentralized Exchanges, Miner Extractable Value, and Consensus Instability · SP 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
Network security › secure communication › secure communication protocol
TLS
0.412020
DECO: Liberating Web Data Using Decentralized Oracles for TLS · 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
Distributed systems › consensus
byzantine agreement
0.412020
Order-Fairness for Byzantine Consensus · CRYPTO (3) 2020
Distributed systems › consensus › byzantine agreement
order-fairness
0.412020
Order-Fairness for Byzantine Consensus · CRYPTO (3) 2020
Cryptographic protocols and secure computation › key management
distributed key generation
0.312018
Fast Multiparty Threshold ECDSA with Fast Trustless Setup · CCS 2018
Cryptographic primitives and cryptanalysis › homomorphic encryption › fully homomorphic encryption
TFHE
0.312018
Threshold Cryptosystems from Threshold Fully Homomorphic Encryption · CRYPTO (1) 2018
Blockchain and cryptocurrency security › electronic cash
bitcoin
0.312017
Zero-Knowledge Contingent Payments Revisited: Attacks and Payments for Services · CCS 2017
Cryptographic protocols and secure computation
fair exchange
0.312017
Zero-Knowledge Contingent Payments Revisited: Attacks and Payments for Services · CCS 2017
Cryptographic primitives and cryptanalysis
post-quantum cryptography
0.312017
Post-Quantum Zero-Knowledge and Signatures from Symmetric-Key Primitives · CCS 2017
Cryptographic protocols and secure computation › proof systems › zero-knowledge proofs
post-quantum zero-knowledge
0.312017
Post-Quantum Zero-Knowledge and Signatures from Symmetric-Key Primitives · CCS 2017
Cryptographic protocols and secure computation › fair exchange
zero-knowledge contingent payment
0.312017
Zero-Knowledge Contingent Payments Revisited: Attacks and Payments for Services · CCS 2017
Graph data management
graph analytics
0.112020
BlockSci: Design and applications of a blockchain analysis platform · USENIX Security Symposium 2020
Blockchain and cryptocurrency security
consensus protocol
0.112020
Order-Fairness for Byzantine Consensus · CRYPTO (3) 2020
Blockchain and cryptocurrency security
cryptocurrency wallet
0.112020
UC Non-Interactive, Proactive, Threshold ECDSA with Identifiable Aborts · CCS 2020

Methods — techniques the papers use, named apart from their topics

graph analysis · 0.9game-theoretic modeling · 0.9empirical measurement · 0.9alternating moduli · 0.5zero-knowledge proofs · 0.4paillier encryption · 0.4non-interactive protocol · 0.4TLS attestation · 0.4Strong RSA · 0.4DDH · 0.4interactive proving · 0.3cryptographic commitment · 0.3
YearPublicationVenuePosition
2021 MPC-Friendly Symmetric Cryptography from Alternating Moduli: Candidates, Protocols, and Applications
Itai Dinur, Steven Goldfeder, Tzipora Halevi, Yuval Ishai, Mahimna Kelkar, Gregory M. Zaverucha
CRYPTO (4)2
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
CCS3
2020 DECO: Liberating Web Data Using Decentralized Oracles for TLS
abstract
Thanks to the widespread deployment of TLS, users can access private data over channels with end-to-end confidentiality and integrity. What they cannot do, however, is prove to third parties the provenance of such data, i.e., that it genuinely came from a particular website. Existing approaches either introduce undesirable trust assumptions or require server-side modifications. Users' private data is thus locked up at its point of origin. Users cannot export data in an integrity-protected way to other applications without help and permission from the current data holder. We propose DECO (short for decentralized oracle) to address the above problems. DECO allows users to prove that a piece of data accessed via TLS came from a particular website and optionally prove statements about such data in zero-knowledge, keeping the data itself secret. DECO is the first such system that works without trusted hardware or server-side modifications. DECO can liberate private data from centralized web-service silos, making it accessible to a rich spectrum of applications. To demonstrate the power of DECO, we implement three applications that are hard to achieve without it: a private financial instrument using smart contracts, converting legacy credentials to anonymous credentials, and verifiable claims against price discrimination.
Fan Zhang 0022, Sai Krishna Deepak Maram, Harjasleen Malvai, Steven Goldfeder, Ari Juels
CCS4
2020 Order-Fairness for Byzantine Consensus
Mahimna Kelkar, Fan Zhang 0022, Steven Goldfeder, Ari Juels
CRYPTO (3)3
2020 Flash Boys 2.0: Frontrunning in Decentralized Exchanges, Miner Extractable Value, and Consensus Instability
abstract
Blockchains, 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
SP2
2020 BlockSci: Design and applications of a blockchain analysis platform
Harry A. Kalodner, Malte Möser, Steven Goldfeder, Martin Plattner, Alishah Chator, Arvind Narayanan
USENIX Security Symposium4
2018 Fast Multiparty Threshold ECDSA with Fast Trustless Setup
abstract
A threshold signature scheme enables distributed signing among n players such that any subgroup of size $t+1$ can sign, whereas any group with t or fewer players cannot. While there exist previous threshold schemes for the ECDSA signature scheme, we are the first protocol that supports multiparty signatures for any $t łeq n$ with an efficient dealerless key generation. Our protocol is faster than previous solutions and significantly reduces the communication complexity as well. We prove our scheme secure against malicious adversaries with a dishonest majority. We implemented our protocol, demonstrating its efficiency and suitability to be deployed in practice.
Rosario Gennaro, Steven Goldfeder
CCS2
2018 Threshold Cryptosystems from Threshold Fully Homomorphic Encryption
Dan Boneh, Rosario Gennaro, Steven Goldfeder, Aayush Jain, Sam Kim, Peter M. R. Rasmussen, Amit Sahai
CRYPTO (1)3
2018 Arbitrum: Scalable, private smart contracts
Harry A. Kalodner, Steven Goldfeder, S. Matthew Weinberg, Edward W. Felten
USENIX Security Symposium2
2018 When the cookie meets the blockchain: Privacy risks of web payments via cryptocurrencies
abstract
Abstract We show how third-party web trackers can deanonymize users of cryptocurrencies. We present two distinct but complementary attacks. On most shopping websites, third party trackers receive information about user purchases for purposes of advertising and analytics. We show that, if the user pays using a cryptocurrency, trackers typically possess enough information about the purchase to uniquely identify the transaction on the blockchain, link it to the user’s cookie, and further to the user’s real identity. Our second attack shows that if the tracker is able to link two purchases of the same user to the blockchain in this manner, it can identify the user’s cluster of addresses and transactions on the blockchain, even if the user employs blockchain anonymity techniques such as CoinJoin. The attacks are passive and hence can be retroactively applied to past purchases. We discuss several mitigations, but none are perfect.
Steven Goldfeder, Harry A. Kalodner, Dillon Reisman, Arvind Narayanan
Proc. Priv. Enhancing Technol.1
2017 Zero-Knowledge Contingent Payments Revisited: Attacks and Payments for Services
abstract
Zero Knowledge Contingent Payment (ZKCP) protocols allow fair exchange of sold goods and payments over the Bitcoin network. In this paper we point out two main shortcomings of current proposals for ZKCP, and propose ways to address them.
Matteo Campanelli, Rosario Gennaro, Steven Goldfeder, Luca Nizzardo
CCS3
2017 Post-Quantum Zero-Knowledge and Signatures from Symmetric-Key Primitives
abstract
We propose a new class of post-quantum digital signature schemes that: (a) derive their security entirely from the security of symmetric-key primitives, believed to be quantum-secure, and (b) have extremely small keypairs, and, (c) are highly parameterizable.
Melissa Chase, David Derler, Steven Goldfeder, Claudio Orlandi, Sebastian Ramacher, Christian Rechberger, Daniel Slamanig, Gregory M. Zaverucha
CCS3
2016 Threshold-Optimal DSA/ECDSA Signatures and an Application to Bitcoin Wallet Security
Rosario Gennaro, Steven Goldfeder, Arvind Narayanan
ACNS2
2013 Elastic Ring Search for Ad Hoc Networks
Simon Shamoun, David Sarne, Steven Goldfeder
MobiQuitous3