140 likes | 226 Views
Resilient Network Coding in the presence of Byzantine Adversaries. Sidharth Jaggi. Michelle Effros Michael Langberg Tracey Ho. Sachin Katti Muriel Médard Dina Katabi. Obligatory Example/History. s. [ACLY00]. [ACLY00] Characterization Non-constructive. b 1. b 2. E V E R B
E N D
Resilient Network Coding in the presence of Byzantine Adversaries Sidharth Jaggi Michelle Effros Michael Langberg Tracey Ho Sachin Katti Muriel Médard Dina Katabi
Obligatory Example/History s [ACLY00] [ACLY00] Characterization Non-constructive b1 b2 E V E R B E T T E R C=2 [LYC03], [KM02] Constructive (linear) Exp-time design b1 b2 [JCJ03], [SET03] Poly-time design Centralized design b1 b1 b2 [HKMKE03], [JCJ03]Decentralized design b1+b2 . . . b1 b1 b1+b2 b1+b2 Tons of work t1 t2 [This work]All the above, plus security (b1,b2) b1 (b1,b2) [SET03] Gap provably exists
Multicast Network Model ALL of Alice’s information decodable EXACTLY by EACH Bob Simplifying assumptions • All links unit capacity • (1 packet/transmission) [GDPHE04],[LME04] – No intereference • Acyclic network
Multicast Network Model 2 ALL of Alice’s information decodable EXACTLY by EACH Bob 2 3 Upper bound for multicast capacity C, C ≤ min{Ci} [ACLY00] With mixing, C = min{Ci} achievable! [LCY02],[KM01],[JCJ03],[HKMKE03] Simple (linear) distributed codes suffice!
Problem! Corrupted links Eavesdropped links Attacked links
Setup Eureka Who knows what Stage • Scheme A B C • Network C • Message A C • Code C • Bad links C • Coin A • Transmit B C • Decode B Eavesdropped links ZI Attacked links ZO Privacy
Results First codes • Optimal rates (C-2ZO,C-ZO) • Poly-time • Distributed • Unknown topology • End-to-end • Rateless • Information theoretically secure • Information theoretically private • Wired/wireless [HLKMEK04],[JLHE05],[CY06],[CJL06],[GP06]
Error Correcting Codes T Y X Y=TX+E Generator matrix Low-weight vector (Reed-Solomon Code) R=C-2ZO E
Distributed multicast [HKMKE03] • Alice: Sends packets. • Bob gets (Each column encoded with same transform T) • Now Bob knows Tand can decode. A “Small” rate-loss I X C packets T TX B2
What happens with errors? • What happens when we implement previous distributed algorithm? • Key idea: think of Calvin's error as an addition to original information flow. • Alice: • Calvin: • Bob: I X R packets ZO packets E2 E1 • Bob: • T,T’ are unknown. • E1,E2are unknown. • System is not linear. • How can Bob recover X? +T’E1 TX T +T’E2 C packets
Overview • Alice: • Calvin: • Bob: Step 1: Show how to construct system of linear equations to help recover X. Step 2: System may have many solutions. Need to add redundancy to X. Calvin I X Step 1: “list decoding” will work as long as R ≤ C-ZO. Step 2: “unique decoding” will need an additional redundancy of ZO. All in all: R = C-2ZO. E2 E1 +T’E1 TX T +T’E2 TX+E T B1 B2 E= T’(E1-E2X)
Properties of E • Col. inTX+E. • = col. ofTX + col. of E. • Claim 1: Ehas column rank ZO(=Calvin's strength). • Proof: Follows from fact that Calvin controls ZO links. • Claim 2: Columns of TX and E span disjoint spaces. • Proof:R≤C-ZO, random encoding. R I X • Alice: • Calvin: • Bob: E2 ZO E1 +T’E1 TX T +T’E2 C = T TX+E = +
Limited eavesdropping: • Calvin can only see the information on ZI links • If ZI<C-ZO=R, can implement a secret channel [JL07] Theorems • Scheme achieves rate C-2ZO (optimal) • Step 1: list decode (R ≤ C-ZO) • Step 2: unique decode (Redundancy = ZO) • Secret channel: Instead of Step 2, send hash of X. Rate = C-ZO (optimal) • Limited Adversary: Calvin limited in eavesdropping – can implement secret channel and obtain rate C-ZO.
Summary Optimal rates Poly-time Distributed Unknown topology End-to-end Rateless Information theoretically secure/private Wired/wireless