Secure Key Agreement over Partially Corrupted Channels
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Key agreement (KA) is a fundamental cryptographic primitive. Assuming that Alice and Bob do not have any prior shared correlation, it has been proved that key agreement with security against a computationally unbounded adversary is impossible if communication is either over a fully public channel, or the channel is fully controlled by the adversary. In this paper we consider a setting where communication is over a partially corrupted channel, and there is no prior shared correlation. We formalize security and reliability of key agreement protocols in this setting, derive bounds on the rate of secret key agreement, and give constructions that achieve the respective bounds. Our results show that secret key agreement, and hence secret message transmission, is possible, as long as a small fraction of the transmitted symbols in each round remain untouched by the adversary. Our results can be extended to key agreement between nodes in a network, when the two nodes are connected by a set of disjoint paths, and in each round a subset of paths is eavesdropped and another subset (possibly with overlap) is tampered with. We relate our results to previous works, and discuss future directions.
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 distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
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".