The advancement of science is possible when knowledge is shared and information is exchanged in a seamless manner. In a world where many businesses rely on information as their main assets, analysis over data is a crucial competitive advantage. Consequently, the amount of data processed and stored will continue to increase, creating a demand for virtualized services. To this end, some applications can be provided as cloud computing resources including Internet of Things (IoT), machine learning, virtual reality (VR) and blockchain. As a result, concerns about custody and privacy of data are on the rise.
Modern concealment/encryption employs mathematical techniques that manipulate positive integers or binary bits. Asymmetric concealment/encryption, such as RSA (Rivest-Shamir-Adleman), relies on number theoretic one-way functions that are predictably difficult to factor and can be made more difficult with an ever-increasing size of the encryption keys. Symmetric encryption, such as DES (Data Encryption Standard) and AES (Advanced Encryption Standard), uses bit manipulations within registers to shuffle the concealed text/cryptotext to increase “diffusion” as well as register-based operations with a shared key to increase “confusion.” Diffusion and confusion are measures for the increase in statistical entropy on the data payload being transmitted. The concepts of diffusion and confusion in encryption are normally attributed as first being identified by Claude Shannon in the 1940s. Diffusion is generally thought of as complicating the mathematical process of generating unencrypted (plain text) data from the encrypted (cryptotext) data, thus, making it difficult to discover the encryption key of the concealment/encryption process by spreading the influence of each piece of the unencrypted (plain) data across several pieces of the concealed/encrypted (cryptotext) data. Consequently, an encryption system that has a high degree of diffusion will typically change several characters of the concealed/encrypted (cryptotext) data for the change of a single character in the unencrypted (plain) data making it difficult for an attacker to identify changes in the unencrypted (plain) data. Confusion is generally thought of as obscuring the relationship between the unencrypted (plain) data and the concealed/encrypted (cryptotext) data. Accordingly, a concealment/encryption system that has a high degree of confusion would entail a process that drastically changes the unencrypted (plain) data into the concealed/encrypted (cryptotext) data in a way that, even when an attacker knows the operation of the concealment/encryption method (such as the public standards of RSA, DES, and/or AES), it is still difficult to deduce the encryption key.
Homomorphic Encryption is a form of encryption that allows computations to be carried out on concealed cipher text as it is concealed/encrypted without decrypting the cipher text that generates a concealed/encrypted result which, when decrypted, matches the result of operations performed on the unencrypted plaintext.
The word homomorphism comes from the ancient Greek language: ktoc (homos) meaning “same” and μoρφ{acute over (η)} (morphe) meaning “form” or “shape.” Homomorphism may have different definitions depending on the field of use. In mathematics, for example, homomorphism may be considered a transformation of a first set into a second set where the relationship between the elements of the first set are preserved in the relationship of the elements of the second set.
For instance, a map f between sets A and B is a homomorphism of A into B if
f(a1 op a2)=f(a1) op f(a2)|a1, a2 ∈ A
where “op” is the respective group operation defining the relationship between A and B.
More specifically, for abstract algebra, the term homomorphism may be a structure-preserving map between two algebraic structures such as groups, rings, or vector spaces. Isomorphisms, automorphisms, and endomorphisms are typically considered special types of homomorphisms. Among other more specific definitions of homomorphism, algebra homomorphism may be considered a homomorphism that preserves the algebra structure between two sets.
An embodiment of the present invention may comprise a method for performing somewhat homomorphic operations on encrypted data in a distributed ledger/blockchain system without decrypting the encrypted data and where data resulting from the somewhat homomorphic operations remains encrypted, the method comprising: generating off-chain by a data owner node device a secret/private key sk and a public evaluation key pk, wherein the secret/private key sk is comprised of a first key multivector (
An embodiment of the present invention may further comprise a distributed ledger/blockchain system that performs somewhat homomorphic operations on encrypted data without decrypting the encrypted data and where data resulting from the somewhat homomorphic operations remains encrypted, the distributed ledger/blockchain system comprising: a data owner node device, wherein the data owner node device further comprises: a key generation subsystem that generates, off-chain, a secret/private key sk and a public evaluation key pk, wherein the secret/private key sk is comprised of a first key multivector (
In the drawings,
The various embodiments aim to address the challenge of expanding Blockchain Technologies (BT) by implementing a somewhat homomorphic encryption scheme that not only enables computation on encrypted data but also yields a key update protocol with which one can selectively reveal consolidated data from a blockchain application. Constructions of the various embodiments are meant to be compliant with the fundamental requirements of BT, including ownership control and non-repudiation. In isolation, BT and homomorphic encryption (HE) can both suffer from performance issues. Combining the two only escalates that risk. We rely on Clifford Geometric Algebra as the single algebraic structure for introducing efficient solutions for merging BT with HE. One target application considers a trusted environment with pre-screened parties, which allows the various embodiments to consider cryptographic solutions based on relaxed notions of security. One possible means of implementation is to encode the various embodiments using the Ruby language.
I. Introduction
Blockchain may be offered as a virtualized resource—Blockchain as a Service (BaaS). Blockchain has been used to reduce costs and the complexity of management, but blockchain raises concerns about the custody of data and the classical Trust Model.
Blockchain is a distributed ledger where the state lies on a linked list of interdependent blocks, persisted under consensus. Blockchain defines a conjunction of technologies behind Bitcoin, where anonymous parties would join a network without permission, so blockchain was initially considered permissionless. The replication of the information amongst participants was onerous. So new initiatives approached the state replication paradigm in a more efficient way, increasing throughput by different consensus mechanisms. Companies then employed the new Distributed Ledger Technology (DLT) concept to promote cooperation, on a premise of identified nodes (i.e., permissioned).
Private blockchains provide immutability and nonrepudiation, but blockchain has restrictive analysis over encrypted data when it is done without segregating information, participants or third-party trusted architectures. Public key cryptography is used in blockchain operations, but its limitations towards computability spawned a new race for Homomorphic Encryption (HE) schemes. Additionally, adversarial behaviors can arise in DLT environments from semi-honest partners, such as the use of shared data to leverage a commercial advantage. HE offers the ability to correctly evaluate encrypted data allowing the outsourcing of computation without loss of privacy. Thus, parties can agree on common scripts implementing HE prior to the operation over data assets.
A. The Problems
The various embodiments may be comprised of functional blocks, each of which may be tailored as described in more detail below according to objectives for scope, capability and security. The following sections provide a mathematical and numerical description of these functional blocks.
Exclusivity is ingrained in the meaning of data property and no repossession lawsuit can restore ownership of digital data once the digital data is shared. Moreover, a legal contract cannot prevent misbehavior, being only a prior agreement on posterior punitive actions. Consequently, under the expectancy of misconduct, companies may avoid cooperation even when contracts provide legal protection.
Conversely, a smart contract defines the behavior prior to an accordance between parties, resembling a legal preventive action that avoids undesired executions. If combined with HE, it can realize blind computations (i.e., big data analytics) where the entity performing the calculations does not know the results of the calculations without gaining permission from the data owner. Additionally, if improved with a homomorphic key update, it can offer a mechanism to transfer ownership without leaving the trusted environment.
Cloud computing became a very expensive structure to reproduce in-house and the market made providing cloud computing a premise to stay competitive. Therefore, blockchain, with its ever-growing database and inherent complexity, has an appeal to be used as a third-party service for storage and management. However, blockchain's philosophy is built on the concept of cryptographic proof instead of trust, which creates a conundrum and weakens the ability of the technology to remain trustworthy since cloud suppliers work under the assumption of reputation and legal agreements. Another competence of blockchains is the capability to share digital assets avoiding power imbalance between parties. Nevertheless, fearing a loss of ownership, companies may restrain themselves from sharing sensitive data that could favor analysis and leverage a commercial relationship or research effort.
In summary, cloud services bring uncertainty in the treatment of Confidentiality, Integrity, and Availability (CIA), whereas partnerships can be restrictive due to lack of trust or regulatory concerns. Therefore, the problems that the various embodiments are addressing in this disclosure includes the following issues.
Problem 1: Given an immutable ledger on a permissioned blockchain setting, provide an efficient privacy preserving smart contract for computing arithmetic functions over encrypted data without violating the principles of ownership (the legal right of data access) and non-repudiation (the assurance that one cannot deny the validity of the data).
Problem 2: Given a smart contract that solves Problem 1, provide the ability to transfer ownership of homomorphically encrypted data without revealing to non-owners anything that is supposed to be known only by data owners.
One of the motivations for Bitcoin was the avoidance of a single point of failure. Avoiding a single point of failure may mean the absence of a computational node due to censorship or a dishonest behavior from a participant. Therefore, publicizing transactions was a means to verify integrity, although secrecy was not a concern. User's anonymity was provided by public key encryption and cryptography took care of the trust for the model.
Furthermore, companies realized that their commercial relationships would benefit from the provenance given by the immutable tracking of events. Also, company partnerships are mediated by legal contracts, facilitating a transition to electronic scripts—smart contracts—when transacting digital assets. Therefore, the applicability of cryptography expands and problems such as data ownership become the main concern. On-chain solutions sometimes are based on the segregation of information or just under-covered data or scripts, not allowing computation or any kind of analytical result over encrypted assets. On the other hand, off-chain implementations can violate the credibility that is only earned when every operation is performed within public sight.
For the various embodiments, two main guidelines must be preserved in order to favor CIA and DLT core principles. First, any sensitive data must be encrypted or decrypted off-chain, in possession of the owner. Second, any operation over an encrypted asset must occur on-chain and the algorithm must be known by the parties and consequently agreed upon before execution. Finally, the script implementing the mathematical operations must be sufficiently efficient to not overload the performance of the consensus mechanism at hand.
C. Clifford Geometric Algebra
Clifford geometric algebra is known by the richness, robustness and flexibility of its algebraic structure, which allows us to take advantage of concepts from several different branches of mathematics such as vector and matrix spaces, integer, rational and complex arithmetic, all in a single compact system. Clifford Geometric Algebra (herein simplified to GA) is a very powerful mathematical system. Some advantages commonly associated with GA computing include compactness of algorithms, implicit use of parallelism and high runtime performance and robustness. In working on the various embodiments it was further noted that three major benefits of working with GA based would be: (1) the ability of working with notions from several different branches of mathematics in a single framework (i.e., modular arithmetic, complex arithmetic, matrix algebra, etc.); (2) how much may be accomplished by even a very small set of computationally inexpensive algebraic tools; and (3) the simplicity of the construction itself, which favors understanding, maintenance and analysis.
An embodiment may advantageously utilize Geometric Algebra to provide the encryption and decryption of numeric messages that may be stored and/operated on within the distributed ledger/blockchain. The use of Clifford Geometric Algebra (aka. Geometric Algebra) to provide the encryption and decryption provides the mathematical basis for the homomorphic operations of an embodiment.
Geometric Algebra is an area of mathematics that describes the geometric interaction of vectors and other objects in a context intended to mathematically represent physical interactions of objects in the physical world. As used herein, this area of mathematics encompasses Geometric Algebra, Conformal Geometric Algebra and Clifford Algebra (referred to collectively herein as “Geometric Algebra” or “GA”). Generally, Geometric Algebra defines the operations, such as geometric product, inverses and identities, which facilitate many features of the various embodiments disclosed herein. Further, Geometric Algebra allows for the organization and representation of data into the “payload” of a multivector where the data in the payload may represent, for example, plaintext, ciphertext, or identifying signatures. Consequently, the various embodiments make beneficial use of Geometric Algebra properties to provide encryption, decryption, and homomorphic operations in a relatively computationally simplistic manner while still providing robust security for both data in motion and data at rest (e.g., data stored in the Cloud).
It may be demonstrated that through multivector decompositions and a small subset of operations in the Clifford Geometric algebra it is possible to propose new methods for general-purpose data representation and data encryption with multivectors. The methods of the various embodiments may be used as part of the necessary reconciliation of data availability and privacy preservation. This is important because once data is encrypted, one cannot meaningfully process it, unless the encryption function is homomorphic with respect to one or more operations. Therefore, homomorphism is a key concern in constructions of the various embodiments since there is particular interest in encryption schemes that allow homomorphic computations over concealed data.
Some fields of applications are inherently complex, as is the case for blockchain technologies and cryptography. The combination of blockchain and cryptography could easily increase the associated complexity exponentially should one fail to take into account the additional complexity from any particular tool or approach. In scenarios like combining blockchain and cryptography, it seems critical to consider solutions that are simple to implement, but are still powerful, so one can achieve much without necessarily adding complexity. For the various embodiments GA seems to be an appealing candidate for providing an efficient cryptographic protocol that aims to expand blockchain capabilities without violating its rigid, but necessary, constraints.
Favoring the quick distinction of a multivector from any other data structure, we use capital letters with an overbar as in
Ā=a0+a1ē1+a2ē2+a3ē3+a12ē12+a13ē13+a23ē23+a123ē123
where ēi is a unit vector along the i-axis and ē12 represents the orientation of the area created by a12. Notably, a Geometric Algebra multivector in N-space (i.e., a N-dimension multivector) has 2N coefficients whereas a standard N-dimension vector has only N coefficients. Accordingly, the Geometric Algebra multivectors provide a sense of size, direction, and volume while a standard vector would only provide a sense of size and direction. As the concepts involved in Geometric Algebra are part of a deep and rich mathematical file, some general observations may be helpful to the description of the various embodiments disclosed herein, below. First, each of the ai values in the multivector Ā above may be “packed” with information and each ai value may range from zero to very large (e.g., >256,000 bits or an entire message). Secondly, the inverse of Ā when multiplied by Ā yields unity, or:
ĀĀ−1=1
Thus, if a second multivector
ĀĀ−1
Computations on the coefficients of
such that
As for the basic operations in q3, similar to the operations of a vector space, one can add, subtract, scalar multiply and scalar divide multivectors component-wise. Multiplication of multivectors is achieved with the geometric product, which is given by Ā
D. Homomorphisms
Given two messages a, b, a function f is homomorphic with respect to a given operation ∘ if f(a∘b)=f(a)∘f(b). When we represent the messages a, b as the multivectors Ā,
The essential purpose of homomorphic encryption is to allow computation on encrypted data without decrypting the data in order to perform the computation. In this way, the encrypted data can remain confidential and secure while the encrypted data is processed for the desired computation. Accordingly, useful tasks may be accomplished on encrypted (i.e., confidential and secure) data residing in untrusted environments. In a world of distributed computation and heterogeneous networking, the ability to perform computations on encrypted data may be a highly desirable capability. Hence, finding a general method for computing on encrypted data is likely a highly desirable goal for cryptography.
A sought-after application of homomorphic encryption may be for distributed ledger/blockchain systems. Encrypting blockchain stored data may mitigate the threat of data being compromised by a breach, but then the owners of the data would not then be able to perform operations (i.e., add, scalar divide, etc.) on the blockchain stored data. In order to perform operations on encrypted data stored in the blockchain, it would be necessary to download the encrypted blockchain stored data, recover/decrypt the data, perform all desired operations on the data locally, encrypt the resulting data and send the resulting data back to the blockchain. Alternatively, if a user wants another blockchain node to perform the computations, the other node would require access to the user's encryption/security keys. It is becoming increasing undesirable to provide others access to a user's security keys as the more entities that have access to the security keys inherently increases the susceptibility of the security keys to being breached, or even stolen by an unscrupulous user. Homomorphic encryption would allow the blockchain to operate on encrypted data without decryption, and without access to the client's security keys.
For the various embodiments, the “payload” may be packed in the values of the scalars and coefficients of the multivector elements. The packing method may define, among many things, the Geometric Algebra operations permissible for an embodiment. For example, the Rationalize operation on multivectors yields zero when all multivector coefficients are equal. Such multivectors having all equal coefficients have no inverse and the geometric product of such multivectors having all equal coefficients with another multivector has no inverse. Different aspects of the various embodiments, including the decryption methodology that utilizes the inverse of the security key(s) multivector to perform the decryption. Therefore, to avoid problems when performing an inverse operation, the various multivectors being utilized in the various embodiments should not have all equal value coefficients, unless specifically identified as being meant to be non-invertible.
II. Target Definitions
Before introducing our specifics of the constructions of the various embodiments to address the problems discussed in Section I-A, a definition of the general syntax and notions aimed to be achieved is presented. This is useful for many reasons including the ability if the desired goals are achieved, but also how well the goals are achieved.
A. SWHE Scheme
The syntax of a SomeWhat Homomorphic Encryption (SWHE) scheme is defined as follows:
Definition 1: A SWHE scheme denoted as:
Π=(Gen, Enc, Dec, Add, SDiv) Eq. 2
is a tuple of efficient (i.e., probabilistic polynomial-time) algorithms with the syntax given by the following paragraphs.
Gen is a probabilistic polynomial-time key-generation algorithm that takes as input the security parameter 1λ and outputs a private-key sk and a public evaluation key pk. The secret key implicitly defines a ring that will serve as the message space. We write the syntax as (sk, pk)←Gen(1λ). The security parameter is usually given in unary notation which indicates a λ-bit string of 1s so the efficiency of the algorithm is expected to be polynomial-time in λ.
Enc is a probabilistic polynomial-time encryption algorithm that takes as input a secret key sk and message m and outputs a ciphertext c as a n-dimensional tuple. We write the syntax as c←Enc(sk,c).
Dec is a deterministic polynomial-time encryption algorithm that takes as input a secret key sk and a ciphertext c and outputs a message m. We write the syntax as m=Dec(sk,c).
Add is a deterministic polynomial-time addition algorithm that takes two ciphertexts c1 and c2 and outputs a ciphertext c which corresponds to the component-wise addition of c1 and c2 reduced modulo pk. We write the syntax as c=Add(pk, c1, c2).
SDiv is a deterministic polynomial-time scalar division algorithm that takes a ciphertext c1 and a scalar α and outputs a ciphertext c which corresponds to the scalar division of all elements of c by α reduced modulo pk. We write the syntax as c=SDiv(pk, c1, α).
Correctness requires the following:
1) For all sk, pk output by Gen, and all m ∈ we have Dec(sk,Enc(sk, m)=m.
2) For all ci←Enc(sk, mi), i=1, 2 and all α∈ , the following holds:
Dec(sk,Enc(sk, Add(pk, c1, c2)))=m1+m2,
Dec(sk,Enc(sk, SDiv(pk, c1, α)))=m1/α. Eq. 3
Definition 2: A SWHE scheme Π is secure if for a uniform m ∈ , all (sk, pk)←Gen(1λ) and all c←Enc(sk,c), no efficient adversary A can recover m by knowing only pk and c.
B. Key Update Protocol
Definition 3: A key update protocol denoted as: Eq. 4
Σ=(TokGen, KeyUpd) Eq. 3
is a tuple of efficient algorithms with the syntax given by the following paragraphs.
TokGen is a deterministic polynomial-time token generation algorithm that takes an old secret key skold and a new secret key sknew and outputs a token t. We write the syntax as t=TokGen (skold, sknew).
KeyUpd is a deterministic polynomial-time key update algorithm that takes a token t and a ciphertext cold, previously encrypted with skold, and outputs a ciphertext cnew that is encrypted with sknew. We write the syntax as cnew=KeyUpd(t, cold).
Definition 4: The key update protocol Σ is secure if for all uniform skold and sknew output by Gen (1λ) and t output by TokGen, the probability of any efficient adversary A to recover either skold or sknew by knowing t, cold and cnew is negligible.
III. Description of the SWHE Scheme
In this section we propose a construction for an embodiment that aims to satisfy the definitions in Section II-A. But first, let us introduce our motivation and a couple of useful remarks and definitions.
Motivation 1: We want to design a SWHE scheme that is secure based on the assumption that solving an underdetermined system of equations is computationally hard. In order to achieve this goal, we propose a design of an encryption function based on randomness and underdeterminancy. We want to transform a message m into a random multivector
Motivation 2: We want to build an encryption scheme to be applied in a private (permissioned) blockchain among trusted parties. Thus, we are providing privacy in a trusted environment assuming that all the parties must follow a given protocol.
Remark 1: Due to Motivation 2, we assume that a relaxed threat model is in place where the adversary is not supposed to have any knowledge about the message that originated a given ciphertext. This allows us to propose an experimental and compact solution to solve Problems 1 and 2, as well as allowing us to introduce and discuss instances of a new approach for expanding BT capabilities with HE.
In Definition 1, the algorithm SDiv, for any useful result, might imply a fractional output. We will introduce a construction in which the encryption function receives positive integers as inputs and generates ciphertexts where the underlying computation is performed over the integers modulo a prime. Since Enc takes integers in Zq as input and generates ciphertexts also over integers in q, the decryption function is expected to output integers in q. The algorithm Add performs homomorphic addition of ciphertexts and the decryption of the results is also an integer. However, in the specific case of SDiv, a ciphertext is divided by a scalar which might result in a non-integer rational number. The scalar division is performed over the integers, with the modular multiplicative inverse. In order to map the integer result of a scalar division to its corresponding rational representation we will use the Extended Euclidean Algorithm (EEA) according to Definition 5 below.
Definition 5: Given a prime p and a positive integer c ∈ p,
let the EEA be computed as follows:
1) Set a0=p, a1=c; b0=0, b1=1; i=1.
2) While ai>└√{square root over (p/2)}┘ compute
3) a/b=ai/bi
4) Return a/b. We write the syntax as a/b=EEA (p, c).
Now we are ready to introduce constructions that satisfy the definitions in II-A. Note that the following constructions take into account the bit size concerns of a computer program. Conceptually, the various embodiments are not limited by the bit size as the conceptual model may theoretically encompass infinite bit size values.
Gen takes as input 1λ and proceeds as follows: (1) set b=λ/8; (2) let q be the smallest prime greater than 2b; (3) choose uniform 16 b-bit integers and define
Enc takes as input sk=(
Dec takes as input sk=(
Add takes as inputpk and
SDiv takes as inputpk,
Lemma 1: For all uniformly generated coefficients of mj ∈ q, where j ∈ {0, 1, 2, 3, 12, 13, 23, 123}, q is prime, and for all m12 as defined in Eq. 5, the result in Eq. 7 holds.
Proof Given the definition of m12 in Eq. 5, let's re-write Eq. 7 as m=ma+mb such that:
ma=m0+m1−m2−m3+m12, Eq. 8
mb=m13−m23−m123. Eq. 9
If we substitute for mu in Eq. 8 we have:
ma=m−m13+m23−m123, Eq. 10
so, when we compute ma+mb adding Eqs. 9 and 10 we obtain:
ma+mb=m−m13+m23+m123+m13−m23−m123=m, Eq. 11
Lemma 2: For any prime q, any non-zero g ∈ q and any
Proof. For any prime q, all non-zero elements g ∈ q have a unique modular multiplicative x=|g−1|q such that |gx|q=1. When we compute
gx+gy=gcd(g, q)=1, Eq. 12
where x, y have integer solutions. We can then rewrite Eq. 12 as:
gx−1=(−y)q and gx≡1 mod q, Eq. 13
and, thus, x is the modular multiplicative inverse of g with respect to q.
For small values of q one can naively compute x by iterating x from 1 to q−1 until finding the result that satisfies |gx|q=1. However, a better way is to use the Extended Euclidean Algorithm (EEA) which can efficiently compute modular multiplicative inverses for large values of g and q as long as gcd(g, q)=1.
Theorem 1: For all sk output by Gen and m ∈ q, we have Dec(sk, Enc(sk, m))=m.
Proof: Recall that in the definition of Gen,
Lemma 3: For all a, b ∈ q that is transformed into Ā,
Proof: For all a, b ∈ q that are represented by Ā,
s12=a−a0−a1+a2+a3−a13+a23+a123+b−b0−b1+b2−b3−b13+b23+b123. Eq. 14
If we organize the coefficients of
sa=a0+b0−a2−a3+b0+b1−b2−b3 Eq. 15
sb=s12
sc=a13−a23−a123+b13−b23−b123,
we compute sa+sb to obtain:
so, essentially, computing sa+sb+sc gives sa+sb+sc=a+b.
Lemma 4: Lemma 2 also applies to scalar multiplication and scalar division of all Ā,
Āg+
Lemma 5: For all prime q,
m/α=Dec(sk, SDiv(pk,
Proof. On the encrypted domain, where computation is performed modulo q, for q is a prime, the scalar division of
Due to Lemma 5, and since we assume that homomorphic scalar divisions will always occur, in order to guarantee the desired result of scalar divisions over encrypted data, we reduce the message space originally defined as q in Gen by u, for u=└√{square root over (q/2)}┘.
Theorem 2: For all (sk, pk) output Gen,
Dec(sk, Add(pk, Enc(sk, m1), α))=m1·α. Eq. 19
and
Dec (sk, Add(pk, Enc(sk, m1), Enc(sk, m2)))=m1+m2, Eq. 20
Proof Given m1, m2, α ∈ q, sk=(
We compute
By applying Lemma 3 ad 4, we obtain m1+m2. Similarly, let
By applying Lemma 3, 4 and 5, we obtain m1/α.
Theorem 3: If an adversary can efficiently solve a system of equations with 8 non-redundant equations and 24 unknowns then can efficiently recover m from
Proof: Let a multivector Ā ∈ q3 be written as:
Ā=A0+A1+A2+A3 Eq. 24
where <·>i, for i ∈ {0,1,2,3}, is called a multivector grade. Grades 0 and 3 contain a single element each and grades 1 and 2 contain three elements each, for a total of 8 elements.
Given
Assuming the adversary only knows
where each element of
Lemma 6: The proposed SWHE Scheme is secure assuming that no adversary can efficiently solve (that is, solve under polynomial-time) an underdetermined system of equations which its underdeterminancy is not affected by the number of ciphertexts samples under consideration.
Proof: Given
The system would then have a total of 24 equations (8 for each cyphertext) and 32 unknowns if solving for both
i.e., the 8 equations with respect to the elements of
Notice that the equations for the elements of
IV. Description of the Key Update Protocol
In this section we propose a construction that aims to satisfy the definitions presented in Section II-B.
Motivation 3: We want to design a key update protocol that securely allows one to update the secret key of an existing ciphertext without revealing the corresponding message, the old key or the new key, also based on the assumption that solving a non-redundant underdetermined system of equation is computationally hard. In order to achieve this goal, we propose a design for a protocol based on underdeterminancy. From the old and the new key, we want to generate a token that is expected to not reveal information about either the old or the new key. Once the token is generated, one should be able to use it for changing the keys on an existing ciphertext under the old key, generating a new ciphertext under the new key. In this process, one should not be able to derive the underlying plaintext message.
TokGen takes as input two secret keys sk1=(
KeyUpd takes as input the token t=(
Theorem 4: For all sk1 and sk2 output by Gen, and all
it holds:
Proof Given the setup in Theorem 4, we verity that:
Theorem 5: If an adversary A can efficiently solve a system of equations with more unknowns than non-redundant equations then A can efficiently recover m from
Proof Given a token t=(
Notice that this system of equations contains a total of 32 equations (8 equations for each of the multivectors
Theorem 6: If an adversary can efficiently solve a system of equations with 8 non-redundant equations and 16 unknowns then can efficiently recover sk1 or sk2 from t.
Proof: The proof of Theorem 6 can be borrowed from the proof of Theorem 5, as the same system of equations and its characteristics apply in this case.
V. Application
In order to provide practical insights on how to connect the proposed constructions to a real-world DLT-based system, we introduce an illustrative design where we apply our SWHE scheme and key update protocol. In our example we describe an instance of the data ownership problem, where regulatory restrictions reduce the solution space for data computation. Due to space limitations, we cannot fully describe the system internals in all its details (i.e., consensus mechanism for persisting data), so we will provide a minimally required high level description of its building blocks.
Motivation 4: $300 billion out of more than $1.7 trillion are spent annually on medical research alone [47] and advancements depend on the reproducibility of experiments and the scientific correctness underlying it. Moreover, healthcare systems operate under strict regulations [48] in order to protect the secrecy of patients, resulting in a very siloed industry [18]. In such scenario, blockchain technologies have the potential to mediate the access to healthcare data [49], avoiding power imbalance over digital assets. With the addition of HE, a DLT system can protect the privacy of individuals' Electronic medical records (EMRs) while offering compliant analysis over their data.
Definition 6: This blockchain application is composed by the building blocks described in the following paragraphs.
User A: The original data owner. Responsible for persisting information on-chain and the one that decides when and to whom the ownership is transferred.
User B: An existing user from the same consortium of User A. User B has access to the off-chain cryptographic library and can perform homomorphic computations on-chain at any time. User B is interested in getting insights of data processed at the blockchain.
App component c: Software that works as an interface between the user and the SWHE scheme and the key update protocol. The App component C imports the algorithms Gen, Enc, and Dec from the SWHE scheme and the TokGen from the key update protocol.
Blockchain component C: A system composed by the ledger (the blockchain database) and a smart contract that controls the access to the ledger. The smart contract imports Add, SDiv from the SWHE scheme and KeyUpd from the key update protocol.
Definition 7: C is a tuple with the following efficient algorithms: NewRecord, GetRecords, GenReport, GenResult, GetReport and GetResult, as described in the following paragraphs.
GenReport generates a report calculating the median of a given number of records. We write the syntax as GenReport (idSLedger), and operates as follows:
GenResult takes as input an id, idLedger, and the generated tokens t to update the keys of a report. We write the syntax as GenResult (idLedger; t), and operates as follows:
GetResult takes as input idLedger and retrieves a report that had its keys updated. We use the syntax GetResult (idLedger).
Example 1: In our example, A represents a hospital that owns patients' records. 8 stands for a research institution that wants to make analysis over patients' data. The medical industry runs under strict regulation and health institutions are forbidden to share personal information from individuals. However, a disease outbreak urged the aforementioned organizations to cooperate. Therefore, the hospital agreed to share information under a security protocol, that could lead to a better triage of patients and, perhaps, a path to a cure.
In the DLT environment, both institutions will have a copy of the data, but their ownership is tied to their keys. Since the smart contract is using a SWHE scheme, computations can be performed homomorphically by B and the property over the resulting analysis can be transferred through the key update protocol by A.
8 wants to calculate the average number of pre-existing conditions of every patient that died from the new illness. Therefore, 8 generates a report over a selection of expired patients. Then, A analyzes the result and decides to grant permission. To do so, a symmetric key is shared with 8 through a traditional key exchange protocol. Now, A updates the keys of the report, allowing 8 to finally detect a high number of pre-existing conditions in patients that did not recover.
VI. Conclusions
Through practical constructions of the various embodiments the realization of a somewhat homomorphic encryption (SWHE) scheme is demonstrated and a key update protocol as a strategy for expanding the current capabilities of blockchain technologies (BT) is also demonstrated. With a very small set of elementary functions found in Clifford geometric algebra, the various embodiments are able to provide simple and yet efficient cryptographic protocols to equip BT with a homomorphic smart contract. Without violating current business logic constraints in BT, one can use constructions of the various embodiments to homomorphically analyze encrypted data, generate reports and transfer the data ownership without compromising the original key holder's and/or third parties' privacy. The disclosure further provides evidence of the various embodiments' proposed algorithms' correctness as well as the security properties the algorithms carry, under some strong assumptions such as the attacker's knowledge restricted to public information.
Hardware Implementation for Data Concealment Embodiments (
Further, generally, any computing device capable of communication over any form of electronic network or bus communication platform may be one, two or all three of the node devices 104-108 shown in
Various embodiments may implement the network/bus communications channel for the blockchain system 102 using any communications channel capable of transferring electronic data. For instance, the network/bus communication connection may be an Internet connection routed over one or more different communications channels during transmission between the node devices 104-108 and the blockchain system 102. Likewise, the network/bus communication connection may be an internal communications bus of a computing device, or even the internal bus of a processing or memory storage Integrated Circuit (IC) chip, such as a memory chip or a Central Processing Unit (CPU) chip. The network/bus communication channel may utilize any medium capable of transmitting electronic data communications, including, but not limited to: wired communications, wireless electro-magnetic communications, fiber-optic cable communications, light/laser communications, sonic/sound communications, etc., and any combination thereof of the various communication channels.
The various embodiments may provide the control and management functions detailed herein via an application operating on the node computing devices 104-108. The node computing devices 104-108 may each be a computer or computer system, or any other electronic devices device capable of performing the communications and computations of an embodiment. The node computing devices 104-108 may include, but are not limited to: a general purpose computer, a laptop/portable computer, a tablet device, a smart phone, an industrial control computer, a data storage system controller, a CPU, a Graphical Processing Unit (GPU), an Application Specific Integrated Circuit (ASI), and/or a Field Programmable Gate Array (FPGA). Notably, the first 102 and/or second 104 computing devices may be the storage controller of a data storage media (e.g., the controller for a hard disk drive) such that data delivered to/from the data storage media is always encrypted so as to limit the ability of an attacker to ever have access to unencrypted data. Embodiments may be provided as a computer program product which may include a computer-readable, or machine-readable, medium having stored thereon instructions which may be used to program/operate a computer (or other electronic devices) or computer system to perform a process or processes in accordance with the various embodiments. The computer-readable medium may include, but is not limited to, hard disk drives, floppy diskettes, optical disks, Compact Disc Read-Only Memories (CD-ROMs), Digital Versatile Disc ROMS (DVD-ROMs), Universal Serial Bus (USB) memory sticks, magneto-optical disks, ROMs, random access memories (RAMs), Erasable Programmable ROMs (EPROMs), Electrically Erasable Programmable ROMs (EEPROMs), magnetic optical cards, flash memory, or other types of media/machine-readable medium suitable for storing electronic instructions. The computer program instructions may reside and operate on a single computer/electronic device or various portions may be spread over multiple computers/devices that comprise a computer system. Moreover, embodiments may also be downloaded as a computer program product, wherein the program may be transferred from a remote computer to a requesting computer by way of data signals embodied in a carrier wave or other propagation medium via a communication link (e.g., a modem or network connection, including both wired/cabled and wireless connections).
Operational Flow Chart for Encryption/Decryption and SWHE Calculations for an Embodiment (
Operational Flow Chart for Key Update Operation for an Embodiment (
The foregoing description of the invention has been presented for purposes of illustration and description. It is not intended to be exhaustive or to limit the invention to the precise form disclosed, and other modifications and variations may be possible in light of the above teachings. The embodiments were chosen and described in order to best explain the principles of the invention and its practical application to thereby enable others skilled in the art to best utilize the invention in various embodiments and various modifications as are suited to the particular use contemplated.
This application is based upon and claims the benefit of U.S. provisional application Ser. No. 63/063,719, filed Aug. 10, 2020, entitled “Towards a Somehwat Homomorphic Key Update Protocol based on Clifford Geometric Algebra for Distributed Ledger Technology,” all of which is also specifically incorporated herein by reference for all that it discloses and teaches.
Number | Name | Date | Kind |
---|---|---|---|
4405829 | Rivest et al. | Sep 1983 | A |
5751808 | Anshel et al. | May 1998 | A |
6560336 | Arita | May 2003 | B1 |
6853964 | Rockwood et al. | Feb 2005 | B1 |
8452975 | Futa et al. | May 2013 | B2 |
8515058 | Gentry | Aug 2013 | B1 |
8719324 | Koc et al. | May 2014 | B1 |
9083526 | Gentry | Jul 2015 | B2 |
9716590 | Gentry | Jul 2017 | B2 |
9749129 | Delerablee et al. | Aug 2017 | B2 |
9906360 | Johnson et al. | Feb 2018 | B2 |
20030223579 | Kanter et al. | Dec 2003 | A1 |
20050193012 | Matsayuma et al. | Sep 2005 | A1 |
20060179489 | Mas Ribes | Aug 2006 | A1 |
20070297614 | Rubin | Dec 2007 | A1 |
20080080710 | Harley et al. | Apr 2008 | A1 |
20090136033 | Sy | May 2009 | A1 |
20090282040 | Callaghan et al. | Nov 2009 | A1 |
20120140920 | Ghouti et al. | Jun 2012 | A1 |
20130254532 | Raykova et al. | Sep 2013 | A1 |
20130322537 | Rossato et al. | Dec 2013 | A1 |
20140140514 | Gentry | May 2014 | A1 |
20150039912 | Payton et al. | Feb 2015 | A1 |
20150100785 | Joye et al. | Apr 2015 | A1 |
20150170197 | Smith et al. | Jun 2015 | A1 |
20150295712 | Veugen | Oct 2015 | A1 |
20150381348 | Takenaka et al. | Dec 2015 | A1 |
20160105402 | Soon-Shiong et al. | Apr 2016 | A1 |
20160119119 | Calapodescu et al. | Apr 2016 | A1 |
20190044697 | Paz de Araujo et al. | Feb 2019 | A1 |
20190109701 | Paz de Araujo et al. | Apr 2019 | A1 |
20190164153 | Agrawal et al. | May 2019 | A1 |
20190386814 | Ahmed | Dec 2019 | A1 |
20200028674 | Bao et al. | Jan 2020 | A1 |
20210065113 | Wynter | Mar 2021 | A1 |
Number | Date | Country |
---|---|---|
107147484 | Sep 2017 | CN |
109831297 | May 2019 | CN |
2012069747 | May 2012 | WO |
2014016795 | Jan 2014 | WO |
Entry |
---|
Wang, et al., “Discrete logarithm based additively homomorphic encryption and secure data aggregation”, Information Sciences, 181, (2011), pp. 3308-3322. |
International Search Report and Written Opinion for PCT/US2018/16000, International Searching Authority, dated Apr. 25, 2018, pp. 14 pages. |
Extended European Search Report, PCT/US2017/045141, dated Nov. 22, 2019, 8 pages. |
Kumar, Mohit, et al., “Efficient implementation of Advanced Encryption Standard (AES) for ARM based Platforms”, 1st Int'l Conf. on Recent Advances in Information Technology, RAIT-20121, 2012, 5 pages. |
Hitzer, Eckhard, et al., “Applications of Clifford's Geometric Algebra”, Adv. Appl. Clifford Algebras 23, (2013), DOI 10.1007, pp. 377-404. |
Non-Final Office Action, entitled, “Methods and Systems for Enhanced Data-Centric Additive Homomorphic Encryption Systems Using Geometric Algebra”, dated Jan. 15, 2020. |
Non-Final Office Action, entitled, “Methods and Systems for Enhanced Data-Centric Scalar Multiplicative Homomorphic Encryption Systems Using Geometric Algebra”, dated Feb. 6, 2020. |
Fau, et al., “Towards practical program execution over fully homomorphic encryption schemes”, IEEE Computer Society, DOI 10.1109/3PGCIC, (2013), pp. 284-290. |
Erkin, et al, “Generating private recommendations efficiently using homomorphic encryption and data packing”, In: IEEE transactions on information forensics and security, vol. 7, No. 3, Jun. 2012, pp. 1053-1066. |
Chatterjee et al., “Searching and Sorting of Fully Homomorphic Encrypted Data on Cloud”, IACR Cryptology ePrint Archive, Oct. 10, 2015, pp. 1-14. |
Emmadi et al., “Updates on sorting of fully homomorphic encrypted data”, 2015 International Conference on Cloud Computing Research and Innovation (ICCCRI), Oct. 27, 2015, 6 pages. |
The International Search Report and Written Opinion of the International Searching Authority, PCT/US2018/56154, dated Dec. 27, 2018, 25 pages. |
The International Search Report and Written Opinion of the International Searching Authority, PCT/US2018/56156, dated Dec. 27, 2018, 23 pages. |
The International Search Report and Written Opinion of the International Searching Authority, PCT/US2017/45141, dated Dec. 18, 2017, 7 pages. |
The International Search Report and Written Opinion of the International Searching Authority, PCT/US2018/26305, dated Jul. 3, 2018, 7 pages. |
The International Search Report and Written Opinion, for PCT/US21/40218, “Methods and Systems for Homomorphic Data Representation and Concealment Powered by Clifford Geometric Algebra”, dated Oct. 1, 2021, 12 pages. |
European Examination Report, for Application No. 17 837 619.0-18, entitled, Methods and Systems for Enhanced Data-Centric Encryption Systems Using Geometric Algebra, dated Mar. 18, 2021,10 pages. |
James M. Chappell, et al., “The double-padlock problem: is secure classical information transmission possible without key exchange?”, School of Electrical and Electronic Engineering, University of Adelaide, SA 5005, Australia, dated Dec. 31, 2012, 4 pages. |
The International Search Report and Written Opinion, PCT/US2020/44808, “Methods and Systems for Encryption and Homomorphic Encryption Systems using Geometric Algebra and Hensel Codes”, dated May 4, 2021, 18 pages. |
The International Search Report and Written Opinion, PCT/US21/45453, “Methods and Systems for Somewhat Homomorphic Encryption and Key Updates Based on Geometric Algebra for Distributed Ledger/Blockchain Technology”, dated Nov. 4, 2021, 7 pages. |
The International Search Report and Written Opinion, PCT/US21/50994, “Methods and Systems for Distributed Computation Within a Fully Homomorphic Encryption Scheme Using P-Adic Numbers”, dated Jan. 28, 2022, 7 pages. |
David W.H.A. da Silva, “An Efficient Homomorphic Data Encoding with Multiple Secret Hensel Codes”, International Journal of Information and Electronics Engineering, vol. 10, No. 1, Mar. 2002, 11 pages. |
Number | Date | Country | |
---|---|---|---|
20220045840 A1 | Feb 2022 | US |
Number | Date | Country | |
---|---|---|---|
63063719 | Aug 2020 | US |