Access-Controlled Inner Product Function-Revealing Encryption
Bibliographic record
Abstract
We extend the concept of access control for functional encryption, introduced by Abdalla et al. (ASIACRYPT 2020), to function-revealing encryption (Joy and Passelègue, SCN 2018). Here "access control" means that function evaluation is only possible when a specified access policy is met. Specifically, we introduce access-controlled inner-product function-revealing encryption (AC-IPFRE) and give two applications. On the theoretical side, we use AC-IPFRE to show that function-hiding inner-product functional encryption (FH-IPFE), introduced by Bishop et al. (ASIACRYPT 2015), is equivalent to IPFRE. To show this, we in particular generically construct AC-IPFRE from IPFRE for the "non-zero inner-product" (NZIP) access policy. This result uses an effective version of Lagrange’s Four Square Theorem. One consequence of this result is that lower bounds by Ünal (EUROCRYPT 2020) suggest that, as for FH-IPFE, bilinear pairings will be needed to build IPFRE. On the practical side, we build an outsourced approximate nearest-neighbor (ANN) search protocol and mitigate its leakage via AC-IPFRE. For this, we construct a practical AC-IPFRE scheme in the generic bilinear group model for a specific access policy for ANN search. To this end, we show that techniques of Wee (TCC 2020) implicitly give the most practical FH-IPFE scheme to date. We implement the resulting outsourced ANN search protocol and report on its performance. Of independent interest, we show AC-IPFRE for NZIP implies attribute-hiding small-universe AC-IPFRE for arbitrary access policies. Previous work on access control for FE did not achieve attribute hiding. Our results demonstrate that AC-IPFRE is of both theoretical and practical interest and set the stage for future work in the area.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.002 | 0.005 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.006 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.004 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.004 | 0.002 |
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.
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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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".