4 ms·

The general concept is "I want to keep this data private and confidential, but I want to be able to rent elastic compute for it". Previously, at the end of the

The general concept is "I want to keep this data private and confidential, but I want to be able to rent elastic compute for it". Previously, at the end of the day, the processor could only do useful work on unencrypted data. But something like "analyze this list of customer records for fraud" or "analyze this proprietary data for trends" has previously either required a lot of trust that your cloud provider isn't going to siphon your data, or just required on-prem hardware that you cannot scale as easily. If "math on encrypted data" works, we could keep our data confidential while still sending of batches of it to be number-crunched at a cloud provider. Or even start talking about distributed / peer-to-peer computing, where a swarm of users (or, say, businesses that wish to cooperate) can send compute jobs to each other without having to trust that the other members weren't going to go snooping through the data that was sent.

alwa 3y ago
And for that matter if I were a provider of some kind of computational service for hire, I (and my insurers) might feel a great deal of relief at the idea that we’re no longer having to sit on a big attractive ransomable pile of our clients’ data.
- Out_of_Characte 3y ago
  Denial of service is still by far the most common tactic, encrypt the data and no one can use it.
Obscurity4340 3y ago
Has any world government implemented this in a similar/relevant fashion that illustrates this in action?
- fragmede 3y ago
  No because this is the very bleeding edge of technology so there are only very limited (but very cool) tech demos of the technology? Nothing at scale yet. https://spiralwiki.com/ https://spiralwiki.com/
calamari4065 3y ago
Wait, so they're doing computation on encrypted data and inferring some information about the relationships between data in the encrypted set? How is that even possible? That seems to defeat the purpose of encryption, or at least show that our encryption is severely flawed. This is the first time I've heard of this and it's kind of blowing my mind
- fiddlerwoaroof 3y ago
  The idea is the result is encrypted too such that, when the person that holds the key gets it back they can decrypt it and see the result. So you can run an inference algorithm on data without ever having to decrypt it and see what the data actually is. It seems to me that this intrinsically is vulnerable to side-channel attacks, but it will be interesting to see if we can avoid those with constant-time algorithms or something.
  - l33t7332273 3y ago
    What about this seems vulnerable to side channels?
    - fiddlerwoaroof 3y ago
      Because, if you have a mechanism to run arbitrary computations on encrypted data, I’d be a bit concerned about an attacker running carefully crafted computations on the data and deducing information about the encrypted data based on how the ciphertext changes or the time/memory usage of the computation. This isn’t really a particularly well-informed suspicion: it’s partly based on a sense that FHE is a “have your cake and eat it too” sort of technology that’s too good to be true and partly based on the recent discoveries that fairly well-understood things like speculative execution in CPUswere vulnerable to serious side-channel attacks.
      - HeadsUpHigh 3y ago
        zk proofs are used in public blockchains to transmit millions in value so I would assume they aren't vulnerable to side channel attacks at least not on a superficial level.
PeterisP 3y ago
The issue with this use-case is that the "I want to be able to rent elastic compute for it" is not a fundamental need or desire, but effectively a desire to save costs for hardware and other infrastructure. Like, for a true need you could imagine someone saying "I really want this, no matter how it costs" - but you wouldn't do that for elastic compute if doing that locally was 100x cheaper; and in a similar way, the "wish to cooperate" by sending compute jobs to each other is meaningful if and only if you can actually save effort this way, but if there's a 100x overhead cost for FHE (and in reality it's far worse than mere 100x), that doesn't make sense, and you'd simply be better off doing it without distributed / peer-to-peer / cloud computing and just buy and maintain your own non-shared hardware even if it's used only 5% of the time. And I'm not sure if FHE can ever get to overhead rates so low that these use cases would start to make sense, like, there's no good reason to assume that a mere 10x overhead FHE is even theoretically possible.

alwa 3y ago

And for that matter if I were a provider of some kind of computational service for hire, I (and my insurers) might feel a great deal of relief at the idea that we’re no longer having to sit on a big attractive ransomable pile of our clients’ data.

Out_of_Characte 3y ago
Denial of service is still by far the most common tactic, encrypt the data and no one can use it.

Obscurity4340 3y ago

Has any world government implemented this in a similar/relevant fashion that illustrates this in action?

fragmede 3y ago
No because this is the very bleeding edge of technology so there are only very limited (but very cool) tech demos of the technology? Nothing at scale yet. https://spiralwiki.com/ https://spiralwiki.com/

calamari4065 3y ago

Wait, so they're doing computation on encrypted data and inferring some information about the relationships between data in the encrypted set? How is that even possible? That seems to defeat the purpose of encryption, or at least show that our encryption is severely flawed. This is the first time I've heard of this and it's kind of blowing my mind

fiddlerwoaroof 3y ago
The idea is the result is encrypted too such that, when the person that holds the key gets it back they can decrypt it and see the result. So you can run an inference algorithm on data without ever having to decrypt it and see what the data actually is. It seems to me that this intrinsically is vulnerable to side-channel attacks, but it will be interesting to see if we can avoid those with constant-time algorithms or something.
- l33t7332273 3y ago
  What about this seems vulnerable to side channels?
  - fiddlerwoaroof 3y ago
    Because, if you have a mechanism to run arbitrary computations on encrypted data, I’d be a bit concerned about an attacker running carefully crafted computations on the data and deducing information about the encrypted data based on how the ciphertext changes or the time/memory usage of the computation. This isn’t really a particularly well-informed suspicion: it’s partly based on a sense that FHE is a “have your cake and eat it too” sort of technology that’s too good to be true and partly based on the recent discoveries that fairly well-understood things like speculative execution in CPUswere vulnerable to serious side-channel attacks.
    - HeadsUpHigh 3y ago
      zk proofs are used in public blockchains to transmit millions in value so I would assume they aren't vulnerable to side channel attacks at least not on a superficial level.

PeterisP 3y ago

The issue with this use-case is that the "I want to be able to rent elastic compute for it" is not a fundamental need or desire, but effectively a desire to save costs for hardware and other infrastructure. Like, for a true need you could imagine someone saying "I really want this, no matter how it costs" - but you wouldn't do that for elastic compute if doing that locally was 100x cheaper; and in a similar way, the "wish to cooperate" by sending compute jobs to each other is meaningful if and only if you can actually save effort this way, but if there's a 100x overhead cost for FHE (and in reality it's far worse than mere 100x), that doesn't make sense, and you'd simply be better off doing it without distributed / peer-to-peer / cloud computing and just buy and maintain your own non-shared hardware even if it's used only 5% of the time. And I'm not sure if FHE can ever get to overhead rates so low that these use cases would start to make sense, like, there's no good reason to assume that a mere 10x overhead FHE is even theoretically possible.