Take the 2-minute tour ×
Cryptography Stack Exchange is a question and answer site for software developers, mathematicians and others interested in cryptography. It's 100% free, no registration required.

In this paper the last sentence of the first paragraph in the abstract states:

We assume a (necessary) “leak-free” preprocessing stage.

But then later on in section 1.4 they say

Another interesting open question is to construct a leakage- resilient MPC protocol without assuming any leak-free stages,

Why do they say the leak-free stage is necessary but then later on they say it's an interesting open question ? When they say it's necessary doesn't that imply there is no open question (i.e. not debatable) ?

Is there any research done on leak-free stageS?

share|improve this question
1  
The "'leak-free' preprocessing stage" is a necessary part of their MPC protocol. $\hspace{1.78 in}$ –  Ricky Demer Oct 29 '13 at 21:10
    
@RickyDemer - Yes - if it is necessary then why does it become and open question late on in the paper? I'm still unclear about this. –  user1068636 Oct 29 '13 at 22:28
1  
I think they are saying assuming leak free is necessary to prove security for their protocol, but it woul be really cool (thus an open problem) to design a protocol that can tolerate leaks in any stage. –  mikeazo Oct 29 '13 at 23:19
    
@mikeazo - that makes sense to me. I guess there's no other explanation that makes sense so I'll mark it as correct if you answer the question. –  user1068636 Oct 29 '13 at 23:33
add comment

1 Answer 1

up vote 2 down vote accepted

I think they are saying assuming leak free is necessary to prove security for their protocol, but it would be really cool (thus an open problem) to design a protocol that can tolerate leaks in any stage.

share|improve this answer
add comment

Your Answer

 
discard

By posting your answer, you agree to the privacy policy and terms of service.

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged or ask your own question.