You signed in with another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.You signed out in another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.You switched accounts on another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.Dismiss alert
Insofar as I can tell, in the 2PC code, shares of beaver triples are generated as (0, 0, 0) for both parties. Due to this (and some other code), shares of all intermediate values are of the form (X, 0). This is worrying for two reasons. First, this is insecure and may produce incorrect latency numbers. Second, all truncations are in fact exact and do not emulate local truncation errors in MPC when done with correct beaver triples. Could you suggest a way to measure accuracy when the MPC suffers from errors caused by local truncation?
Thanks!
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered:
Just wanted to drop you a quick update about this since that email thread a week or two ago -- I haven't forgotten about this issue! Just very underwater, so hopefully I should be able to push something in the next few days.
Hello,
Insofar as I can tell, in the 2PC code, shares of beaver triples are generated as (0, 0, 0) for both parties. Due to this (and some other code), shares of all intermediate values are of the form (X, 0). This is worrying for two reasons. First, this is insecure and may produce incorrect latency numbers. Second, all truncations are in fact exact and do not emulate local truncation errors in MPC when done with correct beaver triples. Could you suggest a way to measure accuracy when the MPC suffers from errors caused by local truncation?
Thanks!
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: