Sign up ×
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 the paper "Multiparty Computation Secure Against Continual Memory Leakage" on pg. 1239 the footnote at the bottom points out the difference between $joint$ leakage and $disjoint$ leakage. The authors say the weakly leakage resilient protocol of BGG+11 cannot be directly used because it only applies to $joint$ leakage.

My understanding is the adversary has been made more powerful and is able to perform disjoint leakage (i.e. he can make leakage requests on random modules at any time).

I was wondering if somebody could explain this footnote a bit more clearly. Why does a weakly resilient protocol not apply directly?

share|improve this question

Your Answer


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

Browse other questions tagged or ask your own question.