Alice and Bob want to run a protocol over a noisy channel, where a certain number of bits are flipped adversarially. Several results take a protocol requiring @math bits of noise-free communication and make it robust over such a channel. In a recent breakthrough result, Haeupler described an algorithm that sends a number of bits that is conjectured to be near optimal in such a model. However, his algorithm critically requires @math knowledge of the number of bits that will be flipped by the adversary. We describe an algorithm requiring no such knowledge. If an adversary flips @math bits, our algorithm sends @math bits in expectation and succeeds with high probability in @math . It does so without any @math knowledge of @math . Assuming a conjectured lower bound by Haeupler, our result is optimal up to logarithmic factors. Our algorithm critically relies on the assumption of a private channel. We show that privacy is necessary when the amount of noise is unknown.
For @math bits to be transmitted from Alice to Bob, Shannon @cite_6 proposes an error correcting code of size @math that yields correct communication over a noisy channel with probability @math . At first glance, this may appear to solve our problem. But consider an interactive protocol with communication complexity @math , where Alice sends one bit, then Bob sends back one bit, and so forth where the value of each bit sent depends on the previous bits received . Two problems arise. First, using block codewords is not efficient; to achieve a small error probability, dummy'' bits may be added to each bit prior to encoding, but this results in a superlinear blowup in overhead. Second, due to the interactivity, an error that occurs in the past can ruin all computation that comes after it. Thus, error correcting codes fall short when dealing with interactive protocols.
@cite_6
1916886752 2043868537 2211831180 2949754091
Assuming that Alice and Bob use a secret noisy channel (modelled by a binary symmetric channel) to send a key, reconciliation is the process of correcting errors between Alice's and Bob's version of the key. This is done by public discussion, which leaks some information about the secret key to an eavesdropper. We show how to construct protocols that leak a minimum amount of information. However this construction cannot be implemented efficiently. If Alice and Bob are willing to reveal an arbitrarily small amount of additional information (beyond the minimum) then they can implement polynomial-time protocols. We also present a more efficient protocol, which leaks an amount of information acceptably close to the minimum possible for sufficiently reliable secret channels (those with probability of any symbol being transmitted incorrectly as large as 15 ). This work improves on earlier reconciliation approaches [R, BBR, BBBSS]. Consider two parties Alice and Bob, who hold private inputs x and y, and wish to compute a function f(x, y) privately in the information theoretic sense; that is, each party should learn nothing beyond f(x, y). However, the communication channel available to them is noisy. This means that the channel can introduce errors in the transmission between the two parties. Moreover, the channel is adversarial in the sense that it knows the protocol that Alice and Bob are running, and maliciously introduces errors to disrupt the communication, subject to some bound on the total number of errors. A fundamental question in this setting is to design a protocol that remains private in the presence of large number of errors. If Alice and Bob are only interested in computing f(x, y) correctly, and not privately, then quite robust protocols are known that can tolerate a constant fraction of errors. However, none of these solutions is applicable in the setting of privacy, as they inherently leak information about the parties' inputs. This leads to the question whether we can simultaneously achieve privacy and error-resilience against a constant fraction of errors. We show that privacy and error-resilience are contradictory goals. In particular, we show that for every constant c > 0, there exists a function f which is privately computable in the error-less setting, but for which no private and correct protocol is resilient against a c-fraction of errors. The same impossibility holds also for sub-constant noise rate, e.g., when c is exponentially small (as a function of the input size). Suppose that Alice wishes to send messages to Bob through a communication channel C1, but her transmissions also reach an eavesdropper Eve through another channel C2. This is the wiretap channel model introduced by Wyner in 1975. The goal is to design a coding scheme that makes it possible for Alice to communicate both reliably and securely. Reliability is measured in terms of Bob's probability of error in recovering the message, while security is measured in terms of the mutual information between the message and Eve's observations. Wyner showed that the situation is characterized by a single constant Cs, called the secrecy capacity, which has the following meaning: for all e >; 0, there exist coding schemes of rate R ≥ Cs-e that asymptotically achieve the reliability and security objectives. However, his proof of this result is based upon a random-coding argument. To date, despite consider able research effort, the only case where we know how to construct coding schemes that achieve secrecy capacity is when Eve's channel C2 is an erasure channel, or a combinatorial variation thereof. Polar codes were recently invented by Arikan; they approach the capacity of symmetric binary-input discrete memoryless channels with low encoding and decoding complexity. In this paper, we use polar codes to construct a coding scheme that achieves the secrecy capacity for a wide range of wiretap channels. Our construction works for any instantiation of the wiretap channel model, as long as both C1 and C2 are symmetric and binary-input, and C2 is degraded with respect to C1. Moreover, we show how to modify our construction in order to provide strong security, in the sense defined by Maurer, while still operating at a rate that approaches the secrecy capacity. In this case, we cannot guarantee that the reliability condition will also be satisfied unless the main channel C1 is noiseless, although we believe it can be always satisfied in practice. We consider the scenario where Alice wants to send a secret (classical) @math -bit message to Bob using a classical key, and where only one-way transmission from Alice to Bob is possible. In this case, quantum communication cannot help to obtain perfect secrecy with key length smaller then @math . We study the question of whether there might still be fundamental differences between the case where quantum as opposed to classical communication is used. In this direction, we show that there exist ciphers with perfect security producing quantum ciphertext where, even if an adversary knows the plaintext and applies an optimal measurement on the ciphertext, his Shannon uncertainty about the key used is almost maximal. This is in contrast to the classical case where the adversary always learns @math bits of information on the key in a known plaintext attack. We also show that there is a limit to how different the classical and quantum cases can be: the most probable key, given matching plain- and ciphertexts, has the same probability in both the quantum and the classical cases. We suggest an application of our results in the case where only a short secret key is available and the message is much longer.