Randomness Extraction: A Survey David Zuckerman University of Texas at Austin.

51
Randomness Extraction: A Survey David Zuckerman University of Texas at Austin

Transcript of Randomness Extraction: A Survey David Zuckerman University of Texas at Austin.

Page 1: Randomness Extraction: A Survey David Zuckerman University of Texas at Austin.

Randomness Extraction: A Survey

David Zuckerman

University of Texas at Austin

Page 2: Randomness Extraction: A Survey David Zuckerman University of Texas at Austin.

Randomness in Computer Science

• Many uses of randomness in CS.– Randomized algorithms– Cryptography– Distributed computing

• But: high-quality randomness expensive.• Can low-quality (weak) randomness suffice?

Page 3: Randomness Extraction: A Survey David Zuckerman University of Texas at Austin.

Models for Weak Randomness

• Independent bits with same, unknown bias– [von Neumann ’51]

• Semirandom sources [Santha-Vazirani ‘84]– δ < Pr[Xi|X1=x1,…,Xi-1=xi-1] < 1-δ– Block sources [Chor-Goldreich ‘85]

• Bit-fixing sources [CFGHRS ‘85,…]– k uniform bits; others set by adversary.

Page 4: Randomness Extraction: A Survey David Zuckerman University of Texas at Austin.

General Weak Random Source [Z ‘90]

• Random variable X on {0,1}n.• General model: min-entropy

• Flat source:– Uniform on A,

|A| ≥ 2k.|A| ³ 2k

{0,1}n

Page 5: Randomness Extraction: A Survey David Zuckerman University of Texas at Austin.

General Weak Random Source [Z ‘90]

• Can arise in different ways:– Physical source of randomness.– Cryptography: condition on adversary’s

information, e.g. bounded storage model.

– Pseudorandom generators (for space s machines): condition on TM configuration.

Page 6: Randomness Extraction: A Survey David Zuckerman University of Texas at Austin.

Goal: Extract Randomness

Ext n bits m bits

statistical error

Problem: Impossible, even for k=n-1, m=1, ε<1/2.

Page 7: Randomness Extraction: A Survey David Zuckerman University of Texas at Austin.

Impossibility Proof

• Suppose f:{0,1}n {0,1} satisfies sources X ∀with H∞(X) ≥ n-1, f(X) ≈ U.

f-1(0)f-1(1)

Take X=f-1(0)

Page 8: Randomness Extraction: A Survey David Zuckerman University of Texas at Austin.

Randomness Extractor: short seed[Nisan-Z ‘93,…, Guruswami-Umans-Vadhan ‘07]

Ext n bits m =.99k bits

statistical error

d=O(log (n/ε)) random bit seed Y

Strong extractor: (Ext(X,Y),Y) ≈ Uniform

Page 9: Randomness Extraction: A Survey David Zuckerman University of Texas at Austin.

Outline

• Seeded Extractors– Basic applications– Alternate view with applications– Sketch of two constructions

• Seedless Extractors for Structured Sources– Algebraic sources: independent, affine, …

• Applications in cryptography

– Complexity-theoretic sources• Crypto-tailored Extractors

Page 10: Randomness Extraction: A Survey David Zuckerman University of Texas at Austin.

Simulating Randomized Algorithms• Randomized algorithm R using m random bits.• Assume only random bits X have H∞(X)≥k>m.

– No high-quality randomness available.

• Given Ext for H∞(X)≥k– seed length d, output length m.

• Simulation with factor 2d blowup:– Run R with random string Ext(x,y1),…,Ext(x,y2d).– Take majority vote or median.

Page 11: Randomness Extraction: A Survey David Zuckerman University of Texas at Austin.

Use in Privacy Amplification[Bennett, Brassard, Robert 1985]

• Goal: convert weak shared secret X to uniform secret.• Unbounded passive adversary.

public

Pick Y

Shared secret = Ext(X,Y). Correct by strong extractor definition.

Page 12: Randomness Extraction: A Survey David Zuckerman University of Texas at Austin.

PRGs for Space-Bounded Machines

• Basic PRG: G(x,y) = (x,Ext(x,y)) [Nisan-Z]• Condition on configuration v after read x.• Whp • Hence whp Ext(X,Y) close to uniform.

• G:{0,1}O(s) {0,1}poly(s) fools space s TMs [NisanZ]• Sometimes can avoid union bound!

– O(log n log log n) bit seed fools read-once polylog-width “regular” BPs [BRRY ‘10,BV ‘10]

– O(log n) bit seed fools read-once O(1)-width permutation BPs [KNP].

Page 13: Randomness Extraction: A Survey David Zuckerman University of Texas at Austin.

PRGs from Shrinkage

• Hardness vs. Randomness paradigm:– Lower bounds give PRGs [Nisan-Wigderson,…].

• But: need superpolynomial lower bounds.• Known: polynomial lower bounds for restricted

models.– E.g., formulas Ω(n3/polylog n) [Andreev, Hastad].

• [Impagliazzo, Meka, Z 2012]: polynomial lower bounds proved via shrinkage give PRGs.– E.g., seed length s1/3+o(1) fools size s formulas.

Page 14: Randomness Extraction: A Survey David Zuckerman University of Texas at Austin.

Graph-Theoretic View: “Expansion”

(1-)M K=2k

D=2d

N=2n

M=2m

Can use this to constructexpanders beatingeigenvalue bound [WZ]

x y Ext(x,y)

output uniform

Page 15: Randomness Extraction: A Survey David Zuckerman University of Texas at Austin.

K-Expanding Graphs

K

N

K

|A|≥K |Γ(A)|>N-K

Goal: minimize degree DD>N/K

Random graphs:D=O((N/K) log (N/K))

2nd Eigenvalue: D≥(N/K)2/2

Extractors: D=N1+o(1)/K [Wigderson-Z ‘93]

Useful for sorting, networks

Page 16: Randomness Extraction: A Survey David Zuckerman University of Texas at Austin.

Extractors K-Expanding Graphs

(1-)M K

N

M

(1-)M

KK-Expanding Graph:V=[N]E=Paths of length 2 in Ext

Page 17: Randomness Extraction: A Survey David Zuckerman University of Texas at Austin.

Alternate View

S

BADS

D=2d

N=2n M=2m

x

Other direction:ErrorS ≤ |BADS|2-k + ε

Page 18: Randomness Extraction: A Survey David Zuckerman University of Texas at Austin.

Averaging Sampler via Alternate View [Z ‘96]

• Goal: Estimate mean μ of– Black box access to f.

Algorithm: Pick x randomly in {0,1}n. Sample f at Γ(x) = {x1,…,xD}.

Output μf.

Pr[error] = |BADf|/2n.

Can use 1.01m random bits with Pr[error]=2-Ω(m).

Page 19: Randomness Extraction: A Survey David Zuckerman University of Texas at Austin.

Extractor Perspective Helps

• Proposition: Sampler using O(m) random bits implies sampler using 1.01m random bits.

• Equivalent Statement: Extractor outputting Ω(k) bits implies extractor outputting .99k bits.

• Ext(x,(y1,y2)) = Ext(x,y1)Ext(x,y2) [Wigderson-Z]– Conditioned on Ext(X,y1) of length m, still ≈k-m bits

of entropy in X.

Page 20: Randomness Extraction: A Survey David Zuckerman University of Texas at Austin.

Extractor Codes via Alt-View[Ta-Shma-Z 2001]

• • List recovery – generalizes list decoding.

S=(S1,…,SD), agreement = |{i|xi in Si}|

|{Codewords with agreement ≥(μ(S) + ε)D}|≤ |BADS|.

Extractor codes with efficient decoding give hardcore bits Ext(x,y) wrt 1-way (f(x),y).

Codes Extractors [Tre,TZS, SU, GUV].

Page 21: Randomness Extraction: A Survey David Zuckerman University of Texas at Austin.

Max Clique and Chromatic Number• [FGLSS,…,Hastad]: Max Clique

inapproximable to n1-, any >0, assuming NP ZPP.

• [LY,…,FK]: Same for Chromatic Number.

• Derandomize with linear degree extractors:Thm [Z]: Both inapproximable to n1-, any >0,

assuming NP P.

Page 22: Randomness Extraction: A Survey David Zuckerman University of Texas at Austin.

Constructions of Strong ExtractorsRestrictions Degree

D=2dOutput Length m

Existence None (n-k)/ε2 k – 2lg(1/ε)

Leftover Hash Lemma [ILL]

None 2n k – 2lg(1/ε)

GUV 2007 None (n/ε)O(1) (1-α)k

GUV 2007 None nO(log(k/ε)) k – 2lg(1/ε)-O(1)

DKSS 2009 ε≥1/logcn nO(1) (1-1/logcn)k

Z 2006 k=Ω(n)ε=Ω(1)

O(n) (1-α)k

Page 23: Randomness Extraction: A Survey David Zuckerman University of Texas at Austin.

Pseudorandom Generators

• Cryptographically secure PRGs:– Run in time less than adversary.– Exist iff one-way functions exist [HILL].

• PRGs for derandomization:– Can take slightly more time than adversary.– Exist iff “hard” functions exist [Nisan-Wigderson ...]

PRGpseudorandomrandom seed

Page 24: Randomness Extraction: A Survey David Zuckerman University of Texas at Austin.

PRGs from Hard Functions[Nisan-Wigderson 1988 …]

PRGcomp. error εrandom seed

hard function

Page 25: Randomness Extraction: A Survey David Zuckerman University of Texas at Austin.

NW-Style PRGs Give Extractors[Trevisan 1999]

• View x as hard function f:{0,1}lg n {0,1}– Most functions hard

• Set Ext(x,y) = NW-PRG(f,y)• Better: Ext(x,y) = NW-PRG(Code(f),y)

Ext n bits

statistical error

seed

Page 26: Randomness Extraction: A Survey David Zuckerman University of Texas at Austin.

Linear Degree Extractor [Z] (Sketch)

Condense:

Extract:

.9

uniform

+ lg n+O(1) random bits

+ O(1) random bits

Page 27: Randomness Extraction: A Survey David Zuckerman University of Texas at Austin.

Condensing via Incidence Graph

• 1-Bit Somewhere Condenser:– Input: edge– Output: random endpoint

• Condenses rate to rate (1+), some > 0.• Proof uses bound on incidences [BKT]+ probabilistic lemma.• Combine with technique of [Raz] to get actual condenser.

linespoints = Fq

2

L

P (L,P) an edge iff P on L

|P|3/2 edges

Page 28: Randomness Extraction: A Survey David Zuckerman University of Texas at Austin.

High Entropy Extractor

• Chernoff bound for random walks on expanders [Gillman,Kahale]

• Implies Sampler• Implies Extractor.

Page 29: Randomness Extraction: A Survey David Zuckerman University of Texas at Austin.

Seeded Extractor Techniques/History

• Hashing based: Z ’90-91, Nisan-Z ‘93, Wigderson-Z ‘93, Srinivasan-Z ’94, Z ‘96, Ta-Shma ‘96, Raz-Reingold-Vadhan ‘99, Reingold-Shaltiel-Wigderson ‘00,

• NW-PRG based: Trevisan ’99, Raz-Reingold-Vadhan ‘99, Impagliazzo-Shaltiel-Wigderson ‘99-00, Ta-Shma-Umans-Z ‘01

• Algebraic/coding theory based: Ta-Shma-Z-Safra ’01, Shaltiel-Umans ‘01, Lu-Reingold-Vadhan-Wigderson ‘03, Gurusmami-Umans-Vadhan ‘07, Ta-Shma-Umans ’12

• Additive combinatorics based: Barak-Kindler-Shaltiel-Sudakov-Wigderson ’05, Raz ‘05, Z ’07, Dvir-Wigderson ‘08, Dvir-Kopparty-Sharaf-Sudan ‘09

Page 30: Randomness Extraction: A Survey David Zuckerman University of Texas at Austin.

Seedless (Deterministic) Extractors for Structured Sources

• Probabilistic Method: If ≤ sources of min-entropy k:

Can deterministically extract m=(1-α)k bits with error 2-αk/3.

• Algebraic sources:– Bit-fixing, affine.

• Independent sources.• Complexity-theoretic sources:

– AC0 sources, small-space sources.

Page 31: Randomness Extraction: A Survey David Zuckerman University of Texas at Austin.

Oblivious Bit-Fixing Sources

• Example: ?0010?111??11.– ? = uniform on {0,1}.– (n-k) bits fixed by adversary; k uniform bits.– Parity extracts 1 bit.

• For k≥logc n, can extract k-o(k) bits [GRS, Rao].• Application: Exposure Resilient Cryptography.

– Adversary learns many bits of secret key.– Can still do cryptography.

Page 32: Randomness Extraction: A Survey David Zuckerman University of Texas at Austin.

Affine Extractors

• X = random element from affine subspace.• Generalizes bit-fixing sources.• Extractor for min-entropy αn, any α>0

[Bourgain].• 1-bit disperser for min-entropy exp(log.9 n)

[Shaltiel].• Large fields: any k>0 [Gabizon-Raz].

Page 33: Randomness Extraction: A Survey David Zuckerman University of Texas at Austin.

Independent Sources

n bits n bits

Ext

m =Ω(k) bits statistical error

Page 34: Randomness Extraction: A Survey David Zuckerman University of Texas at Austin.

Classical: entropy rate > 1/2

• Lindsey Lemma: H∞ (X) + H∞ (Y) > n+t implies

X.Y ≈ U, error 2-t/2.

Page 35: Randomness Extraction: A Survey David Zuckerman University of Texas at Austin.

Independent Sources# sources k=H∞(X) Restrictions

Existence 2 k ≥ 2log n None

Bourgain 2 k ≥ .499n None

BRSW 2 k ≥ nα Disperser

Li 3 k ≥ n1/2+α None

Rao-Z 3 k ≥ nα Uneven lengths

Li O(1) k ≥ log3 n None

Page 36: Randomness Extraction: A Survey David Zuckerman University of Texas at Austin.

Cryptography with Weak Sources

• Players have independent weak sources.• Allow Byzantine faults.• For 2 players, impossible [DOPS].• For more players, possible!

Page 37: Randomness Extraction: A Survey David Zuckerman University of Texas at Austin.

Network Extractor Protocol [Goldwasser-Sudan-Vaikunthanatan05, Dodis-

Oliveira03]

010101010

01001011011011

11010

100100101

10100

010100101

10110

011110101

11001

01010101

01001

001010101

01001

010111101

10101

Input: x1,…,xp 2 {0,1}n from independent weak random sources

Output: z1,…,zp 2 {0,1}m private nearly-uniformrandom strings (for honest parties)

Byzantine faults:can send arbitrary messages

Page 38: Randomness Extraction: A Survey David Zuckerman University of Texas at Austin.

Network Extractor Protocols

• After running network extractor protocol, run standard protocol, e.g., Byzantine Agreement.

• Naïve idea to design protocol:– A few players broadcast sources.– Remaining players apply independent-source

extractor to those sources and own source.– Problem: what if only malicious players

broadcast?

Page 39: Randomness Extraction: A Survey David Zuckerman University of Texas at Austin.

Network Extractor Constructions

• Information-theoretic setting [Kalai-Li-Rao-Z]:– For k ≥ exp(logα n), can still tolerate linear number

of faults in BA and leader election, any α>0.• Computational setting [Kalai-Li-Rao]:

– Under certain crypto assumptions, for k = αn, secure multiparty computation if ≥ 2 honest players.

– Under certain crypto assumptions, 2-source extractors for k = αn, any α>0.

Page 40: Randomness Extraction: A Survey David Zuckerman University of Texas at Austin.

Complexity-Theoretic Sources

• X=f(U), complexity(f) small.• Deterministic extraction possible under

assumptions [Trevisan-Vadhan ‘00].• No assumptions:

– NC0 [De-Watson ‘11, Viola ‘11]– AC0 [Viola ‘11]– Proofs reduce to low-weight affine extractors [Rao

‘09].

Page 41: Randomness Extraction: A Survey David Zuckerman University of Texas at Austin.

Small Space Sources• Space s source: min-entropy k source

generated by width 2s branching program.

n+1 layers

1 1 0 1 0 0

1/, 0

1-1/, 0 1,10.1,0

0.8,1

0.1,0

0.3,0

0.5,10.1,1

0.1,0

1

width 2s

Page 42: Randomness Extraction: A Survey David Zuckerman University of Texas at Austin.

Bit Fixing Sources can be modelled by Space 0 sources

? 1 ? ? 0 1

0.5,1 0.5,1 0.5,1

0.5,0 0.5,0 0.5,0

1,1 1,0 1,1

Page 43: Randomness Extraction: A Survey David Zuckerman University of Texas at Austin.

Extractors for Small Space Sources

• For k ≥ αn, any α>0, space αβn, β>0 sufficiently small, can extract k-o(k) bits [Kamp-Rao-Vadhan-Z ‘06].

• Proof reduces to variants of independent sources by conditioning on intermediate states.

Page 44: Randomness Extraction: A Survey David Zuckerman University of Texas at Austin.

Crypto-Tailored Extractors

• Fuzzy extractors– Noise tolerant [Dodis-Ostrovsky-Reyzin-Smith ‘04]

• Correlation extractors– [Ishai-Kushilevitz-Ostrovsky-Sahai ‘09].

• Non-malleable extractors [Dodis-Wichs ’09]

Page 45: Randomness Extraction: A Survey David Zuckerman University of Texas at Austin.

Privacy Amplification With Active Adversary

• Problem: Active adversary could change Y to Y’.

public

Pick Y

Shared secret = Ext(X,Y).

Page 46: Randomness Extraction: A Survey David Zuckerman University of Texas at Austin.

Active Adversary

• Can arbitrarily insert, delete, modify, and reorder messages.

• E.g., can run several rounds with one party before resuming execution with other party.

Page 47: Randomness Extraction: A Survey David Zuckerman University of Texas at Austin.

Non-Malleable Extractor[Dodis-Wichs 2009]

• Strong extractor: (Ext(X,Y),Y) ≈ (U,Y).• nmExt is a non-malleable extractor if for arbitrary

A:{0,1}d {0,1}d with y’ = A(y) ≠ y.(nmExt(X,Y),nmExt(X,Y’),Y) ≈ (U,nmExt(X,Y’),Y)

• Can’t ignore a bit of the seed.• Existence: k > log log n + c, d = log n + O(1),

m = (k-log d)/2.01.• Gives privacy amplification with active adversary in

2 rounds with optimal entropy loss.

Page 48: Randomness Extraction: A Survey David Zuckerman University of Texas at Austin.

Explicit Non-Malleable Extractor

• Even k=n-1, m=1 nontrivial.– E.g., Ext(x,y) = x.y. X=0??...?, y’=A(y) flips first bit,

x.y’= x.y.

• Dodis-Li-Wooley-Z 2011: H∞ (X) > n/2.• Cohen-Raz-Segev 2012: Seed length O(log n).• Li 2012: H∞ (X) > .499n.

– Connection with 2-source extractors.

Page 49: Randomness Extraction: A Survey David Zuckerman University of Texas at Austin.

A Simple 1-Bit Construction [Li]

• Sidon set: set S with all s+t, s,t in S, distinct.• Example: S={(x,x3)|x in F2n/2}.

• Thm [Li]: f(x,y) = x.y, y uniform from S, nonmalleable extractor for H∞ (X) > n/2.

• Proof: H∞ (Y) = n/2, so X.Y ≈ U (Lindsey’s lemma).

• Suffices to show X.Y+X.A(Y) ≈ U (XOR lemma).• X.Y+X.A(Y) = X.(Y+A(Y)). • H∞ (Y+A(Y)) = H∞ (Y) = n/2.

Page 50: Randomness Extraction: A Survey David Zuckerman University of Texas at Austin.

Conclusions

• Interesting mathematics used in constructions: additive combinatorics, coding theory, random walks on expander graphs, hashing, …

Crypto

Expanders Coding Theory

Extractors

PRGs Inapproximability

Page 51: Randomness Extraction: A Survey David Zuckerman University of Texas at Austin.

Open Questions

• Seeded Extractors– O(n) degree for all min-entropy.– O(log n) seed to extract k - 2log(1/ε) – O(1).

• Seedless Extractors– 2-source extractors for min-entropy αn, any α>0. – Affine extractors for min-entropy nα.– Other general models.

• Crypto-Tailored Extractors– Non-malleable extractors for min-entropy αn.

• Other Applications & Connections.