3 ms·
I still don't see your point. Afaik, we could have something like: Input = FHE(data|opcode1|opcode2|...|opcodeN) The server won't know what are the (opcode1|.
by darkmighty 12y ago
I still don't see your point. Afaik, we could have something like:
Input = FHE(data|opcode1|opcode2|...|opcodeN)
The server won't know what are the (opcode1|...|opcodeN) if the FHE scheme is properly implemented. That is, the actual implementation would be something like
Input' = FHE(data|opcode1|opcode2|...|opcodeN|randomness)
Output' = InverseHE(FHEval(Input'))
Output = Output' - randomness
I.e. the server can't uncover the (data,opcode1,...,opcodeN) tuple by enumeration if exp(randomness) is large enough. Is this what you had in mind?
- SilasX 12y agoSee my reply to nullc: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=7790084 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=7790084 It still has to execute the opcodes, revealing the computation in that sense. All the randomness adds (if I understand your example) is additional "junk" computation, that's unrelated to the output you really want -- but that's no different than you can already get with "plain" FHE, with obfuscation, or with adding pointless operations to a regular program.