MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2063578896 · doi:10.1145/2810103.2813616

Deniable Key Exchanges for Secure Messaging

2015· article· en· W2063578896 on OpenAlexafffund
Nik Unger, Ian Goldberg

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicCryptography and Data Security
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Waterloo
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada
KeywordsComputer scienceComputer securityForward secrecySecrecyComposabilityCryptographyKey exchangeKey (lock)Internet privacyPublic-key cryptographyEncryptionDistributed computing

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

In the wake of recent revelations of mass government surveillance, secure messaging protocols have come under renewed scrutiny. A widespread weakness of existing solutions is the lack of strong deniability properties that allow users to plausibly deny sending messages or participating in conversations if the security of their communications is later compromised. Deniable authenticated key exchanges (DAKEs), the cryptographic protocols responsible for providing deniability in secure messaging applications, cannot currently provide all desirable properties simultaneously. We introduce two new DAKEs with provable security and deniability properties in the Generalized Universal Composability framework. Our primary contribution is the introduction of Spawn, the first non-interactive DAKE that offers forward secrecy and achieves deniability against both offline and online judges; Spawn can be used to improve the deniability properties of the popular TextSecure secure messaging application. We also introduce an interactive dual-receiver cryptosystem that can improve the performance of the only existing interactive DAKE with competitive security properties. To encourage adoption, we implement and evaluate the performance of our schemes while relying solely on standard-model assumptions.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame machine prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.010
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.028
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: Theoretical or conceptual
GenreCandidate signal: Methods · Consensus signal: Methods
Teacher disagreement score0.010
Threshold uncertainty score0.054

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0100.028
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0030.006
Scholarly communication0.0050.017
Open science0.0030.009
Research integrity0.0030.008
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0090.002

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.051
GPT teacher head0.273
Teacher spread0.221 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designTheoretical or conceptual
Domainnot available
GenreMethods

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations39
Published2015
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicCryptography and Data SecurityFrench-language works237,207