searching on encrypted data without revealing the search predicate n.
Skip this Video
Loading SlideShow in 5 Seconds..
Searching on Encrypted Data Without Revealing the Search Predicate PowerPoint Presentation
Download Presentation
Searching on Encrypted Data Without Revealing the Search Predicate

play fullscreen
1 / 12
Download Presentation

Searching on Encrypted Data Without Revealing the Search Predicate - PowerPoint PPT Presentation

trixie
83 Views
Download Presentation

Searching on Encrypted Data Without Revealing the Search Predicate

- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - E N D - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
Presentation Transcript

  1. Searching on Encrypted Data Without Revealing the Search Predicate Ananth Raghunathan Stanford University (joint work with Dan Boneh & Gil Segev)

  2. Public-Key Encryption public key secret key c m m Bob Alice Learns nothing! ≈ (to ) More precisely:

  3. Public-Key Encryption with Keyword Search Payment Routing Gateway Scenario 1: Payment Gateway

  4. Public-Key Encryption with Keyword Search Assistant Email routing proxy Urgent! Later Scenario 2: Email forwarding

  5. Requirements An encryption scheme that allow untrusted proxies to test for keywords (“tokens”) • Without a token, the proxy learns nothing. • With a token, the proxy learns whether message contains the keyword or not and nothing else. • (Implied) Tokens generated by secret key holder.

  6. PEKS definition (Boneh et al. ‘04) secret key public key “BoA” • PEKS(pk,w) is publicly computable • Generating Tokw requires the secret key • Given TokBoA and PEKS(pk, w), the gateway can check if keyword w=“BoA” or not (algorithm Test) Payment Routing Gateway TokBoA PEKS (pk, “BoA”) TokWF TokChase TokBoA

  7. Security: Overview Informally: the attacker is given tokens of his choice and should not be able to Test for w for which he does not have a token. (to ) Payment Routing Gateway PEKS (pk, “BoA”) Yes for “BoA” TokWF TokChase TokBoA

  8. Security: Overview Informally: the attacker is given tokens of his choice and should not be able to Test for w for which he does not have a token. (to ) Payment Routing Gateway PEKS (pk, “JP Morgan”) TokWF TokChase TokBoA

  9. Predicate privacy • Previous research did not consider information leaked by Tok • Several schemes even explicitly leak w in Tokw • Motivation 1: Payment gateway • Routing information might be sensitive • Transactions tagged with “suspected fraudulent” or other attributes that affect routing but shouldn’t be revealed to a gateway • Motivation 2: Encrypted email filter • Keywords are sensitive: “Urgent” keywords might leak information about personal life or medical data • Can we model a realistic notion of predicate privacy? • Can we construct schemes that satisfy predicate privacy?

  10. Our work Email example: Proxy encrypts PEKS(pk, “Doctor’s appointment”) and sees whether Tok outputs Y or N • Model predicate privacy (“Tokwleaks no more information than necessary”) • Closely related to program obfuscation • If attacker can guess w then he can check quickly:Compute PEKS(pk,w) and test if Tokoutputs “yes” or “no” • Our definition: If the keyword w “cannot be guessed” by the attacker, then Tokw≈ Tokrandom • Constructions: First PEKS schemes with predicate privacy • We give a general approach to add predicate privacy to existing schemes

  11. More expressive predicates In PEKS, p(id) checks if id = w or not and sk corresponds to Tok • A different formulation • Encrypt a tuple (id,m) • Secret key skp • Decryption algorithm given Enc(id,m) and skp recover m only if p(id)=1 • [Boneh et al. ‘04]: Equality predicate (point function) • [Boneh-Waters ‘07]: Conjunctive, subset, and range queries • [Katz-Sahai-Waters ‘08, Agrawal-Freeman-Vaikuntanathan ‘11]: Inner product, polynomial equations, and disjunctions • [Shen-Shi-Waters ‘09]: Inner product (but symmetric-key setting) • [Shi-Waters ‘08, Okamoto-Takashima ‘09, Lewko et al. ‘10]: Hierarchical inner product systems

  12. Thank you!Any questions? ananthr@stanford.edu