Search Results
| Search type | Search syntax |
|---|---|
| Tags | [tag] |
| Exact | "words here" |
| Author |
user:1234 user:me (yours) |
| Score |
score:3 (3+) score:0 (none) |
| Answers |
answers:3 (3+) answers:0 (none) isaccepted:yes hasaccepted:no inquestion:1234 |
| Views | views:250 |
| Code | code:"if (foo != bar)" |
| Sections |
title:apples body:"apples oranges" |
| URL | url:"*.example.com" |
| Saves | in:saves |
| Status |
closed:yes duplicate:no migrated:no wiki:no |
| Types |
is:question is:answer |
| Exclude |
-[tag] -apples |
| For more details on advanced search visit our help page | |
Results tagged with oblivious-transfer
Search options not deleted
user 53246
Oblivious transfer refers to a cryptographic protocol in which a sender possesses a set of data and a receiver queries the sender for a particular member of that set in such a way that the sender does not learn which member the receiver requests. In other words, the sender is oblivious of what information was actually transferred to the receiver.
5
votes
0
answers
795
views
Public key encryption from (1,2)-oblivious transfer
Prove that any two rounds of (1,2)-oblivious transfer, that is semi honestly secure, imply public key encryption.
My ideas so far:
Let's say Alice samples two $n$ random strings $(x_1, x_2)$, a …
- 123