Coin Flipping with Constant Bias Implies One-Way Functions
Abstract
It is well known (cf. Impagliazzo and Luby [in Proceedings of the 30th Annual IEEE Symposium on Foundations of Computer Science, 1989, pp. 230--235]) that the existence of almost all “interesting" cryptographic applications, i.e., ones that cannot hold information theoretically, implies one-way functions. An important exception where the above implication is not known, however, is the case of coin-flipping protocols. Such protocols allow honest parties to mutually flip an unbiased coin, while guaranteeing that even a cheating (efficient) party cannot bias the output of the protocol by much. Impagliazzo and Luby proved that coin-flipping protocols that are safe against negligible bias do imply one-way functions, and, very recently, Maji, Prabhakaran, and Sahai [in Proceedings of the 2001 51st Annual IEEE Symposium on Foundations of Computer Science, 2010, pp. 613--622] proved the same for constant-round protocols (with any nontrivial bias). For the general case, however, no such implication was known. We make progress towards answering the above fundamental question, showing that (strong) coin-flipping protocols safe against a constant bias (concretely, $\frac{\sqrt2 -1}2 - o(1)$) imply one-way functions.
Keywords
MSC codes
Get full access to this article
View all available purchase options and get full access to this article.
References
1.
B. Averbuch, M. Blum, B. Chor, S. Goldwasser, and S. Micali, How to Implement Bracha's $O(\log n)$ Byzantine Agreement Algorithm, unpublished manuscript, 1985.
2.
A. Beimel, E. Omri, and I. Orlov, Protocols for multiparty coin toss with dishonest majority, in Advances in Cryptology---CRYPTO 2010, Springer-Verlag, Berlin, Heidelberg, 2010, pp. 538--557.
3.
M. Ben-Or and N. Linial, Collective coin flipping, robust voting schemes and minima of Banzhaf values, in Proceedings of the 26th Annual IEEE Symposium on Foundations of Computer Science (FOCS), 1985, pp. 408--416.
4.
M. Blum, Coin flipping by telephone, in Advances in Cryptology---CRYPTO '81, Springer-Verlag, Berlin, Heidelberg, 1981, pp. 11--15.
5.
A. Chailloux and I. Kerenidis, Optimal quantum strong coin flipping, in Proceedings of the 2009 50th Annual IEEE Symposium on Foundations of Computer Science (FOCS), 2009, pp. 527--533.
6.
K.-M. Chung and F.-H. Liu, Parallel repetition theorems for interactive arguments, in Theory of Cryptography, 7th Theory of Cryptography Conference, TCC 2010, Springer-Verlag, Berlin, Heidelberg, 2010, pp. 19--36.
7.
R. Cleve, Limits on the security of coin flips when half the processors are faulty, in Proceedings of the 18th Annual ACM Symposium on Theory of Computing (STOC), 1986, pp. 364--369.
8.
R. Cleve and R. Impagliazzo, Martingales, Collective Coin Flipping and Discrete Control Processes, manuscript, 1993.
9.
D. Dachman-Soled, Y. Lindell, M. Mahmoody, and T. Malkin, On the black-box complexity of optimally-fair coin tossing, in Theory of Cryptography, 8th Theory of Cryptography Conference, TCC 2011, Springer-Verlag, Berlin, Heidelberg, 2011, pp. 450--467.
10.
O. Goldreich, S. Goldwasser, and S. Micali, On the cryptographic applications of random functions, in Advances in Cryptology---CRYPTO '84, Springer-Verlag, Berlin, Heidelberg, 1984, pp. 276--288.
11.
O. Goldreich, S. Goldwasser, and S. Micali, How to construct random functions, J. ACM, 33 (1986), pp. 792--807.
12.
O. Goldreich and L. A. Levin, A hard-core predicate for all one-way functions, in Proceedings of the 21st Annual ACM Symposium on Theory of Computing (STOC), 1989, pp. 25--32.
13.
I. Haitner, A parallel repetition theorem for any interactive argument, in Proceedings of the 2009 50th Annual IEEE Symposium on Foundations of Computer Science (FOCS), 2009, pp. 241--250.
14.
I. Haitner, M.-H. Nguyen, S. J. Ong, O. Reingold, and S. Vadhan, Statistically hiding commitments and statistical zero-knowledge arguments from any one-way function, SIAM J. Comput., 39 (2009), pp. 1153--1218.
15.
I. Haitner and E. Omri, Coin flipping with constant bias implies one-way functions, in Proceedings of the 2011 52nd Annual IEEE Symposium on Foundations of Computer Science (FOCS), 2011, pp. 110--119.
16.
J. H\aastad, R. Impagliazzo, L. A. Levin, and M. Luby, A pseudorandom generator from any one-way function, SIAM J. Comput., 28 (1999), pp. 1364--1396.
17.
J. H\aastad, R. Pass, D. Wikström, and K. Pietrzak, An efficient parallel repetition theorem, in Theory of Cryptography, 7th Theory of Cryptography Conference, TCC 2010, Springer-Verlag, Berlin, Heidelberg, 2010, pp. 1--18.
18.
R. Impagliazzo, Pseudo-Random Generators for Cryptography and for Randomized Algorithms, Ph.D. thesis, Department of Electrical Engineering and Computer Science, University of California, Berkeley, CA, 1992.
19.
R. Impagliazzo and M. Luby, One-way functions are essential for complexity based cryptography, in Proceedings of the 30th Annual IEEE Symposium on Foundations of Computer Science (FOCS), 1989, pp. 230--235.
20.
A. Y. Kitaev, Quantum coin-flipping, presentation at the Workshop on Quantum Information Processing, Mathematical Sciences Research Institute, Berkeley, CA, 2002.
21.
H. K. Maji, M. Prabhakaran, and A. Sahai, On the computational complexity of coin flipping, in Proceedings of the 2010 51st Annual IEEE Symposium on Foundations of Computer Science (FOCS), 2010, pp. 613--622.
22.
C. Mochon, Quantum Weak Coin Flipping with Arbitrarily Small Bias, preprint, arXiv:0711.4114v1 [quant-ph], 2007.
23.
T. Moran, M. Naor, and G. Segev, An optimally fair coin toss, in Theory of Cryptography, 6th Theory of Cryptography Conference, TCC 2009, Springer-Verlag, Berlin, Heidelberg, 2009, pp. 1--18.
24.
M. Naor, Bit commitment using pseudorandomness, J. Cryptology, 4 (1991), pp. 151--158.
25.
M. Naor and M. Yung, Universal one-way hash functions and their cryptographic applications, in Proceedings of the 21st Annual ACM Symposium on Theory of Computing (STOC), 1989, pp. 33--43.
26.
J. Rompel, One-way functions are necessary and sufficient for secure signatures, in Proceedings of the 22nd Annual ACM Symposium on Theory of Computing (STOC), 1990, pp. 387--394.
27.
S. Zachos, Probabilistic quantifiers, adversaries, and complexity classes: An overview, in Proceedings of the First Annual IEEE Conference on Computational Complexity, 1986, pp. 383--400.
Information & Authors
Information
Published In
Copyright
© 2014, Society for Industrial and Applied Mathematics.
History
Submitted: 24 August 2012
Accepted: 6 November 2013
Published online: 4 March 2014
Keywords
MSC codes
Authors
Metrics & Citations
Metrics
Citations
If you have the appropriate software installed, you can download article citation data to the citation manager of your choice. Simply select your manager software from the list below and click Download.
Cited By
- Game-Theoretically Fair Distributed SamplingAdvances in Cryptology – CRYPTO 2024 | 16 August 2024
- Interactive Proofs For Differentially Private CountingProceedings of the 2023 ACM SIGSAC Conference on Computer and Communications Security | 21 November 2023
- On the complexity of fair coin flippingTheoretical Computer Science, Vol. 914 | 1 May 2022
- A Lower Bound for Adaptively-Secure Collective Coin Flipping ProtocolsCombinatorica, Vol. 41, No. 1 | 30 November 2020
- A Tight Lower Bound on Adaptively Secure Full-Information Coin Flip2020 IEEE 61st Annual Symposium on Foundations of Computer Science (FOCS) | 1 Nov 2020
- On the Complexity of Fair Coin FlippingTheory of Cryptography | 4 November 2018
- Game Theoretic Notions of Fairness in Multi-party Coin TossTheory of Cryptography | 4 November 2018
- Blockwise p-Tampering Attacks on Cryptographic Primitives, Extractors, and LearnersTheory of Cryptography | 5 November 2017
- An Optimally Fair Coin TossJournal of Cryptology, Vol. 29, No. 3 | 21 February 2015
- Coin flipping of any constant bias implies one-way functionsProceedings of the forty-sixth annual ACM symposium on Theory of computing | 31 May 2014
View Options
Get Access
- Access via your Institution
- Questions about how to access this content? Contact SIAM at [email protected].