Demo Data from SIGIR 2026 / reviewers in the wild / expert
Gilad Stern
dblp:268/6673
· DBLP profile ↗
18ranked-venue papers
0as first author
16since 2021 · last 2026
—ORCID · conflict
Domains — the database's venue-derived domains; a paper can count in several
Security and privacy · 8 · 8 since 2021Systems, architecture and hardware · 6 · 5 since 2021Theory of computation · 3 · 3 since 2021
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
7 papers |
Cryptographic protocols and secure computation · 64% Cryptographic primitives and cryptanalysis · 26% Blockchain and cryptocurrency security · 10% | |
| Theoretical computer science
3 papers |
Distributed computing theory · 100% | |
| Computer architecture, parallel and distributed computing, and storage systems
4 papers |
Distributed systems · 100% |
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 › key management
distributed key generation |
1.7 | 3 | 2023 | Bingo: Adaptivity and Asynchrony in Verifiable Secret Sharing and Distributed Key Generation · CRYPTO (1) 2023 Reaching Consensus for Asynchronous Distributed Key Generation · PODC 2021 Aggregatable Distributed Key Generation · EUROCRYPT (1) 2021 |
Distributed computing theory › fault tolerance › byzantine fault tolerance
byzantine agreement |
1.3 | 2 | 2025 | Asynchronous Algorand: Reaching Agreement with Near Linear Communication and Constant Expected Time · PODC 2025 Revisiting Asynchronous Fault Tolerant Computation with Optimal Resilience · PODC 2020 |
Distributed systems
consensus |
1.1 | 4 | 2026 | Reaching Consensus for Asynchronous Distributed Key Generation · PODC 2021 Nearly Quadratic Asynchronous Distributed Key Generation from Recursive Consensus · PODC 2026 Bingo: Adaptivity and Asynchrony in Verifiable Secret Sharing and Distributed Key Generation · CRYPTO (1) 2023 |
Cryptographic protocols and secure computation › secure multiparty computation
perfect security |
1.0 | 1 | 2026 | Fast and Efficient Perfectly Secure Network-Agnostic Secure Computation · EUROCRYPT 2026 |
Cryptographic protocols and secure computation
secure multiparty computation |
1.0 | 1 | 2026 | Fast and Efficient Perfectly Secure Network-Agnostic Secure Computation · EUROCRYPT 2026 |
Cryptographic primitives and cryptanalysis › public-key cryptography
digital signatures |
0.8 | 1 | 2024 | HARTS: High-Threshold, Adaptively Secure, and Robust Threshold Schnorr Signatures · ASIACRYPT (3) 2024 |
Cryptographic primitives and cryptanalysis › public-key cryptography › digital signatures › discrete logarithm signature
schnorr signatures |
0.8 | 1 | 2024 | HARTS: High-Threshold, Adaptively Secure, and Robust Threshold Schnorr Signatures · ASIACRYPT (3) 2024 |
Cryptographic primitives and cryptanalysis › public-key cryptography › digital signatures
threshold signature |
0.8 | 1 | 2024 | HARTS: High-Threshold, Adaptively Secure, and Robust Threshold Schnorr Signatures · ASIACRYPT (3) 2024 |
Distributed systems › consensus › fault-tolerant consensus
asynchronous consensus |
0.7 | 2 | 2023 | Reaching Consensus for Asynchronous Distributed Key Generation · PODC 2021 Bingo: Adaptivity and Asynchrony in Verifiable Secret Sharing and Distributed Key Generation · CRYPTO (1) 2023 |
Cryptographic protocols and secure computation
secret sharing |
0.7 | 1 | 2023 | Bingo: Adaptivity and Asynchrony in Verifiable Secret Sharing and Distributed Key Generation · CRYPTO (1) 2023 |
Cryptographic protocols and secure computation › secret sharing
verifiable secret sharing |
0.7 | 1 | 2023 | Bingo: Adaptivity and Asynchrony in Verifiable Secret Sharing and Distributed Key Generation · CRYPTO (1) 2023 |
Cryptographic protocols and secure computation › key management › distributed key generation
asynchronous distributed key generation |
0.5 | 1 | 2021 | Reaching Consensus for Asynchronous Distributed Key Generation · PODC 2021 |
Distributed computing theory
fault tolerance |
0.4 | 1 | 2020 | Revisiting Asynchronous Fault Tolerant Computation with Optimal Resilience · PODC 2020 |
Distributed systems › consensus
byzantine agreement |
0.3 | 1 | 2026 | Nearly Quadratic Asynchronous Distributed Key Generation from Recursive Consensus · PODC 2026 |
Blockchain and cryptocurrency security › blockchain scalability
scalable consensus |
0.3 | 1 | 2025 | Asynchronous Algorand: Reaching Agreement with Near Linear Communication and Constant Expected Time · PODC 2025 |
Cryptographic protocols and secure computation
threshold cryptography |
0.2 | 1 | 2024 | HARTS: High-Threshold, Adaptively Secure, and Robust Threshold Schnorr Signatures · ASIACRYPT (3) 2024 |
Methods — techniques the papers use, named apart from their topics
verifiable random function · 1.7secure erasure · 1.7threshold cryptography · 1.0secure multiparty computation · 1.0public key infrastructure · 1.0game-theoretic analysis · 0.7
| Year | Publication | Venue | Position |
|---|---|---|---|
| 2026 | Fast and Efficient Perfectly Secure Network-Agnostic Secure Computation
Gilad Asharov, Fatima Elsheimy, Gilad Stern |
EUROCRYPT | 3 |
| 2026 | Nearly Quadratic Asynchronous Distributed Key Generation from Recursive Consensus
Ittai Abraham, Renas Bacho, Julian Loss, Gilad Stern |
PODC | 4 |
| 2025 | Asynchronous Algorand: Reaching Agreement with Near Linear Communication and Constant Expected TimeabstractThe celebrated Algorand protocol solves validated byzantine agreement in a scalable manner in the synchronous setting. In this paper, we study the feasibility of similar solutions in the asynchronous setting. Our main result is an asynchronous validated byzantine agreement protocol that we call Asynchronous Algorand. As with Algorand, it terminates in an expected constant number of rounds, and honest parties send an expected O(n polylog n) bits, where n is the number of parties. The protocol is resilient to a fully-asynchronous weak-adaptive adversary that can corrupt a near-optimal number of parties (< (1/3 - ϵ)n) and requires just a verifiable random function (VRF) setup and secure erasures. Ittai Abraham, Eli Chouatt, Yossi Gilad, Gilad Stern, Sophia Yakoubov |
PODC | 4 |
| 2024 | HARTS: High-Threshold, Adaptively Secure, and Robust Threshold Schnorr Signatures
Renas Bacho, Julian Loss, Gilad Stern, Benedikt Wagner |
ASIACRYPT (3) | 3 |
| 2024 | Asynchronous Agreement on a Core Set in Constant Expected Time and More Efficient Asynchronous VSS and MPC
Ittai Abraham, Gilad Asharov, Arpita Patra, Gilad Stern |
TCC (4) | 4 |
| 2024 | Consensus in the Presence of Overlapping Faults and Total Omission
Julian Loss, Kecheng Shi 0001, Gilad Stern |
TCC (1) | 3 |
| 2023 | Uncle Maker: (Time)Stamping Out The Competition in EthereumabstractWe present and analyze an attack on Ethereum 1's consensus mechanism, which allows miners to obtain higher mining rewards compared to their honest peers. This attack is novel in that it relies on manipulating block timestamps and the difficulty-adjustment algorithm (DAA) to give the miner an advantage whenever block races ensue. We call our attack Uncle Maker, as it induces a higher rate of uncle blocks. We describe several variants of the attack. Among these, one that is risk-free for miners. Aviv Yaish, Gilad Stern, Aviv Zohar |
CCS | 2 |
| 2023 | Bingo: Adaptivity and Asynchrony in Verifiable Secret Sharing and Distributed Key Generation
Ittai Abraham, Philipp Jovanovic, Mary Maller, Sarah Meiklejohn, Gilad Stern |
CRYPTO (1) | 5 |
| 2023 | On the Round Complexity of Asynchronous Crusader Agreement
Ittai Abraham, Naama Ben-David, Gilad Stern, Sravya Yandamuri |
OPODIS | 3 |
| 2023 | Zombies and Ghosts: Optimal Byzantine Agreement in the Presence of Omission Faults
Julian Loss, Gilad Stern |
TCC (4) | 2 |
| 2023 | Reaching consensus for asynchronous distributed key generation
Ittai Abraham, Philipp Jovanovic, Mary Maller, Sarah Meiklejohn, Gilad Stern, Alin Tomescu |
Distributed Comput. | 5 |
| 2022 | New Dolev-Reischuk Lower Bounds Meet Blockchain Eclipse Attacks
Ittai Abraham, Gilad Stern |
OPODIS | 2 |
| 2022 | Brief Announcement: Authenticated Consensus in Synchronous Systems with Mixed Faults
Ittai Abraham, Danny Dolev, Alon Kagan, Gilad Stern |
DISC | 4 |
| 2022 | Revisiting asynchronous fault tolerant computation with optimal resilienceabstractThe celebrated result of Fischer, Lynch and Paterson is the fundamental lower bound for asynchronous fault tolerant computation: any 1-crash resilient asynchronous agreement protocol must have some (possibly measure zero) probability of not terminating. In 1994, Ben-Or, Kelmer and Rabin published a proof-sketch of a lesser known lower bound for asynchronous fault tolerant computation with optimal resilience in face of a Byzantine adversary: if $$n\le 4t$$ then any t-resilient asynchronous verifiable secret sharing protocol must have some non-zero probability of not terminating. Our main contribution is to revisit this lower bound and provide a rigorous and more general proof. Our second contribution is to show how to avoid this lower bound. We provide a protocol with optimal resilience that is almost surely terminating for a strong common coin functionality. Using this new primitive we provide an almost surely terminating protocol with optimal resilience for asynchronous Byzantine agreement that has a new fair validity property. To the best of our knowledge this is the first asynchronous Byzantine agreement with fair validity in the information theoretic setting. Ittai Abraham, Danny Dolev, Gilad Stern |
Distributed Comput. | 3 |
| 2021 | Aggregatable Distributed Key Generation
Kobi Gurkan, Philipp Jovanovic, Mary Maller, Sarah Meiklejohn, Gilad Stern, Alin Tomescu |
EUROCRYPT (1) | 5 |
| 2021 | Reaching Consensus for Asynchronous Distributed Key GenerationabstractWe give a protocol for Asynchronous Distributed Key Generation (A-DKG) that is optimally resilient (can withstand f < n over 3 faulty parties), has a constant expected number of rounds, has Õ (n3) expected communication complexity, and assumes only the existence of a PKI. Prior to our work, the best A-DKG protocols required Ω(n) expected number of rounds, and Ω(n4) expected communication. Ittai Abraham, Philipp Jovanovic, Mary Maller, Sarah Meiklejohn, Gilad Stern, Alin Tomescu |
PODC | 5 |
| 2020 | Information Theoretic HotStuffabstractThis work presents Information Theoretic HotStuff (IT-HS), a new optimally resilient protocol for solving Byzantine Agreement in partial synchrony with information theoretic security guarantees. In particular, IT-HS does not depend on any PKI or common setup assumptions and is resilient to computationally unbounded adversaries. IT-HS is based on the Primary-Backup view-based paradigm. In IT-HS, in each view, and in each view change, each party sends only a constant number of words to every other party. This yields an $O(n^2)$ word and message complexity in each view. In addition, IT-HS requires just $O(1)$ persistent local storage and $O(n)$ transient local storage. Finally, like all Primary-Backup view-based protocols in partial synchrony, after the system becomes synchronous, all nonfaulty parties decide on a value in the first view a nonfaulty leader is chosen. Moreover, like PBFT and HotStuff, IT-HS is optimistically responsive: with a nonfaulty leader, parties decide as quickly as the network allows them to do so, without regard for the known upper bound on network delay. Our work improves in multiple dimensions upon the information theoretic version of PBFT presented by Miguel Castro, and can be seen as an information theoretic variant of the HotStuff paradigm. Ittai Abraham, Gilad Stern |
OPODIS | 2 |
| 2020 | Revisiting Asynchronous Fault Tolerant Computation with Optimal Resilience
Ittai Abraham, Danny Dolev, Gilad Stern |
PODC | 3 |