Abstract. Cryptographic assumptions regarding tamper proof hardware tokens have gained increasing attention. Even if the tamperproof hardware is issued by one of the parties, and hence not necessarily trusted by the other, many tasks become possible: Tamper proof hardware is sufficient for universally composable protocols, for informationtheoretically secure protocols, and even allow to create software which can only be used once (One-Time-Programs). However, all known protocols employing tamper-proof hardware are either indirect, i.e., additional computational assumptions must be used to obtain general two party computations or a large number of devices must be used. In this work we present the first protocol realizing universally composable two-party computations (and even trusted One-Time-Programs) with informationtheoretic security using only one single tamper-proof device issued by one of the mutually distrusting parties.

Assume that an adversary observes many ciphertexts, and may then ask for openings, i.e. the plaintext and the randomness used for encryption, of some of them. Do the unopened ciphertexts remain secure? There are several ways to formalize this question, and the ensuing security notions are not known to be implied by standard notions of encryption security. In this work, we relate the two existing flavors of selective opening security. Our main result is that indistinguishability-based selective opening security and simulation-based selective opening security do not imply each other.We show our claims by counterexamples. Concretely, we construct two public-key encryption schemes. One scheme is secure under selective openings in a simulation-based sense, but not in an indistinguishability-based sense. The other scheme is secure in an indistinguishability-based sense, but not in a simulation-based sense.Our results settle an open question of Bellare et al. (Eurocrypt 2009). Also, taken together with known results about selective opening secure encryption, we get an almost complete picture how the two flavors of selective opening security relate to standard security notions.

Abstract. In this paper we present simple but comprehensive combinatorial criteria for completeness of finite deterministic 2-party functions with respect to information-theoretic security. We give a general protocol construction for efficient and statistically secure reduction of oblivious transfer to any finite deterministic 2-party function that fulfills our criteria. For the resulting protocols we prove universal composability. Our results are tight in the sense that our criteria still are necessary for any finite deterministic 2-party function to allow for implementation of oblivious transfer with statistical privacy and correctness.We unify and generalize results of Joe Kilian (1991Kilian ( , 2000 in two ways. Firstly, we show that his completeness criteria also hold in the UC framework. Secondly, what is our main contribution, our criteria also cover a wide class of primitives that are not subject of previous criteria. We show that there are non-trivial examples of finite deterministic 2-party functions that are neither symmetric nor asymmetric and therefore have not been covered by existing completeness criteria so far.As a corollary of our work, every finite deterministic 2-party function is either complete or can be considered equivalent to a non-complete symmetric 2-party function-this assertion holds true with respect to active adversaries as well as passive adversaries. Thereby known results on non-complete symmetric 2-party functions are strengthened.

Universally composable secure computation was assumed to require trusted setups, until it was realized that parties exchanging (untrusted) tamper-proof hardware tokens allow an alternative approach (Katz; EUROCRYPT 2007). This discovery initialized a line of research dealing with two different types of tokens. Using only a single stateful token, one can implement general statistically secure two-party computation (Döttling, Kraschewski, Müller-Quade; TCC 2011); though all security is lost if an adversarial token receiver manages to physically reset and rerun the token. Stateless tokens, which are secure by definition against any such resetting-attacks, however, do provably not suffice for statistically secure computation in general (Goyal, Ishai, Mahmoody, Sahai; CRYPTO 2010).We investigate the natural question of what is possible if an adversary can reset a token at most a bounded number of times (e.g., because each resetting attempt imposes a significant risk to trigger a self-destruction mechanism of the token). Somewhat surprisingly, our results come close to the known positive results with respect to non-resettable stateful tokens. In particular, we construct polynomially many instances of statistically secure and universally composable oblivious transfer, using only a constant number of tokens. Our techniques have some abstract similarities to previous solutions, which we grasp by defining a new security property for protocols that use oracle access. Additionally, we apply our techniques to zero-knowledge proofs and obtain a protocol that achieves the same properties as bounded-query zero-knowledge PCPs (Kilian, Petrank, Tardos; STOC 1997), even if a malicious prover may issue stateful PCP oracles.

Universally composable multi-party computation is impossible without setup assumptions. Motivated by the ubiquitous use of secure hardware in many real world security applications, Katz (EUROCRYPT 2007) proposed a model of tamper-proof hardware as a UC-setup assumption. An important aspect of this model is whether the hardware token is allowed to hold a state or not. Real world examples of tamper-proof hardware that can hold a state are expensive hardware security modules commonly used in mainframes. Stateless, or resettable hardware tokens model cheaper devices such as smartcards, where an adversarial user can cut off the power supply, thus resetting the card's internal state.A natural question is how the stateful and the resettable hardware model compare in their cryptographic power, given that either the receiver or the sender of the token (and thus the token itself) might be malicious. In this work we show that any UC-functionality that can be implemented by a protocol using a single untrusted stateful hardware token can likewise be implemented using a single untrusted resettable hardware token, assuming only the existence of one-way functions.We present two compilers that transform UC-secure protocols in the stateful hardware model into UC-secure protocols in the resettable hardware model. The first compiler can be proven secure assuming merely the existence of one-way functions. However, it (necessarily) makes use of computationally rather expensive non-black-box techniques. We provide an alternative second compiler that replaces the expensive non-black-box component of the first compiler by few additional seed OTs. While this second compiler introduces the seed OTs as additional setup assumptions, it is computationally very efficient.