Strong Hardness of Privacy from Weak Traitor Tracing
July 20, 2016 Β· Declared Dead Β· π Theory of Cryptography Conference
"No code URL or promise found in abstract"
Evidence collected by the PWNC Scanner
Authors
Lucas Kowalczyk, Tal Malkin, Jonathan Ullman, Mark Zhandry
arXiv ID
1607.06141
Category
cs.CR: Cryptography & Security
Cross-listed
cs.DS
Citations
10
Venue
Theory of Cryptography Conference
Last Checked
4 months ago
Abstract
Despite much study, the computational complexity of differential privacy remains poorly understood. In this paper we consider the computational complexity of accurately answering a family $Q$ of statistical queries over a data universe $X$ under differential privacy. A statistical query on a dataset $D \in X^n$ asks "what fraction of the elements of $D$ satisfy a given predicate $p$ on $X$?" Dwork et al. (STOC'09) and Boneh and Zhandry (CRYPTO'14) showed that if both $Q$ and $X$ are of polynomial size, then there is an efficient differentially private algorithm that accurately answers all the queries, and if both $Q$ and $X$ are exponential size, then under a plausible assumption, no efficient algorithm exists. We show that, under the same assumption, if either the number of queries or the data universe is of exponential size, and the other has size at least $\tilde{O}(n^7)$, then there is no differentially private algorithm that answers all the queries. In both cases, the result is nearly quantitatively tight, since there is an efficient differentially private algorithm that answers $\tildeΞ©(n^2)$ queries on an exponential size data universe, and one that answers exponentially many queries on a data universe of size $\tildeΞ©(n^2)$. Our proofs build on the connection between hardness results in differential privacy and traitor-tracing schemes (Dwork et al., STOC'09; Ullman, STOC'13). We prove our hardness result for a polynomial size query set (resp., data universe) by showing that they follow from the existence of a special type of traitor-tracing scheme with very short ciphertexts (resp., secret keys), but very weak security guarantees, and then constructing such a scheme.
Community Contributions
Found the code? Know the venue? Think something is wrong? Let us know!
π Similar Papers
In the same crypt β Cryptography & Security
R.I.P.
π»
Ghosted
R.I.P.
π»
Ghosted
The Limitations of Deep Learning in Adversarial Settings
R.I.P.
π»
Ghosted
Distillation as a Defense to Adversarial Perturbations against Deep Neural Networks
R.I.P.
π»
Ghosted
Spectre Attacks: Exploiting Speculative Execution
R.I.P.
π»
Ghosted
How To Backdoor Federated Learning
R.I.P.
π»
Ghosted
Evasion Attacks against Machine Learning at Test Time
Died the same way β π» Ghosted
R.I.P.
π»
Ghosted
Federated Learning: Strategies for Improving Communication Efficiency
R.I.P.
π»
Ghosted
In-Datacenter Performance Analysis of a Tensor Processing Unit
R.I.P.
π»
Ghosted
Deep Convolutional Neural Networks for Computer-Aided Detection: CNN Architectures, Dataset Characteristics and Transfer Learning
R.I.P.
π»
Ghosted