Lower Bounds for Leakage-Resilient Secret Sharing
Jesper Buus Nielsen, Mark Simkin
Abstract
Threshold secret sharing allows a dealer to split a secret into shares such that any authorized subset of cardinality at least of those shares efficiently reveals the secret, while at the same time any unauthorized subset of cardinality less than contains no information about the secret. Leakage-resilience additionally requires that the secret remains hidden even if one is given a bounded amount of additional leakage from every share.
In this work, we study leakage-resilient secret sharing schemes and prove a lower bound on the share size and the required amount of randomness of any information-theoretically secure scheme. We prove that for any information-theoretically secure leakage-resilient secret sharing scheme either the amount of randomness across all shares or the share size has to be linear in . More concretely, for a secret sharing scheme with -bit long shares, -bit leakage per share, where shares uniquely define the remaining shares, it has to hold that
We use this lower bound to gain further insights into a question that was recently posed by Benhamouda et al. (CRYPTO'18), who ask to what extend existing regular secret sharing schemes already provide protection against leakage. The authors proved that Shamir's secret sharing is -bit leakage-resilient for reconstruction thresholds and conjectured that it is also -bit leakage-resilient for any other threshold that is a constant fraction of the total number of shares. We do not disprove their conjecture, but show that it is the best one could possibly hope for. Concretely, we show that for large enough and any constant it holds that Shamir's secret sharing scheme is not leakage-resilient for .
In contrast to the setting with information-theoretic security, we show that our lower bound does not hold in the computational setting. That is, we show how to construct a leakage-resilient secret sharing scheme in the random oracle model that is secure against computationally bounded adversaries and violates the lower bound stated above.
Ask about this paper
Ask your agent about it.
Lune has read the top-tier papers around this one, so every answer names the papers it rests on.
Your agent calls
Lunesearch_papers
Free to start. No credit card required.
Terminal
Install the CLIlune papers get a814e4a4-2372-456c-a6a6-486bca0db2ceCited by top-tier papers4
- Leakage-Resilience of the Shamir Secret-Sharing Scheme Against Physical-Bit LeakagesHemanta K. Maji, Hai H. Nguyen, Anat Paskin-Cherniavsky, Tom Suad et al.EUROCRYPT 2021 · 27 citations
- Extractors and Secret Sharing Against Bounded Collusion ProtocolsEshan Chattopadhyay, Jesse Goodman, Vipul Goyal, Ashutosh Kumar et al.FOCS 2020 · 18 citations
- Short Leakage Resilient and Non-malleable Secret Sharing SchemesNishanth Chandran, Bhavana Kanukurthi, Sai Lakshmi Bhavana Obbattu, Sruthi SekarCRYPTO 2022 · 11 citations
- Constructing Leakage-Resilient Shamir's Secret Sharing: Over Composite Order FieldsHemanta K. Maji, Hai H. Nguyen, Anat Paskin-Cherniavsky, Xiuyu YeEUROCRYPT 2024 · 8 citations
Related papers
- New Bounds on the Local Leakage Resilience of Shamir's Secret Sharing SchemeOhad Klein, Ilan KomargodskiCRYPTO 2023 · 15 citations
- Constructing Locally Leakage-Resilient Linear Secret-Sharing SchemesHemanta K. Maji, Anat Paskin-Cherniavsky, Tom Suad, Mingyuan WangCRYPTO 2021 · 18 citations
- On the Security of Linear Secret Sharing with General Noisy Side-Channel LeakageUtkarsh Gupta, Hessam MahdavifarEUROCRYPT 2026 · 1 citation
- Physical-Bit Leakage Resilience of Linear Code-Based Secret SharingHai H. NguyenEUROCRYPT 2025 · 3 citations
- Non-malleable Secret Sharing Against Bounded Joint-Tampering Attacks in the Plain ModelGianluca Brian, Antonio Faonio, Maciej Obremski, Mark Simkin et al.CRYPTO 2020 · 17 citations
