Intro to Fully Homomorphic Encryption
blog.higashi.tech
Intro to Fully Homomorphic Encryption
1–10 of 31 posts
Re: Intro to Fully Homomorphic Encryption
#2The author touched on the performance problem but is anyone aware of homomorphic encryption being used in the real world today, outside of academia?
Re: Intro to Fully Homomorphic Encryption
#3This is only a "Gentle Intro" if you know advanced mathematical notation.
Re: Intro to Fully Homomorphic Encryption
#4This is only a "Gentle Intro" if you know advanced mathematical notation.
Which really speaks to the complexity of the field. It'll be another century before the ELI5 version comes along.
Re: Intro to Fully Homomorphic Encryption
#5The author touched on the performance problem but is anyone aware of homomorphic encryption being used in the real world today, outside of academia?
I googled and found a Brazilian bank trying it out:
https://www.darkreading.com/threat-intelligence/major-brazil...
Re: Intro to Fully Homomorphic Encryption
#6The author touched on the performance problem but is anyone aware of homomorphic encryption being used in the real world today, outside of academia?
Because of the sheer performance challenges, and the availability of SGX as an alternative, and also the competitiveness of MPC, I think most use cases struggle to justify selecting homomorphic encryption as the best choice.
To me, who is involved in related fields but not FHE directly, it seems like practical FHE is probably 15 or more years away, even for niche use cases.
Re: Intro to Fully Homomorphic Encryption
#7If Enc(2) + Enc(3) = Enc(5), and Enc(1) + Enc(4) = Enc(5). Does Enc(5) represent the same ciphertext in both cases? I'm asking because, if so, shouldn't it be trivial to uncover the plaintexts if you can perform any math op on the ciphertexts?
Re: Intro to Fully Homomorphic Encryption
#8This is only a "Gentle Intro" if you know advanced mathematical notation.
Which really speaks to the complexity of the field. It'll be another century before the ELI5 version comes along.
ELI5 level isn't what I'd want, personally. Cryptography is of interest to many programmers, and the mental gymnastics needed for mathematics and programming are quite similar. This topic could be explained to a much broader audience without the mathematical notation, albeit not nearly as concisely, and it'd likely lack the exacting precision afforded by the notation.
Re: Intro to Fully Homomorphic Encryption
#9If Enc(2) + Enc(3) = Enc(5), and Enc(1) + Enc(4) = Enc(5). Does Enc(5) represent the same ciphertext in both cases? I'm asking because, if so, shouldn't it be trivial to uncover the plaintexts if you can perform any math op on the ciphertexts?
It represents the same plaintext, but the ciphertexts are different and both computationally indistinguishable from random noise (unless you know the key)
Re: Intro to Fully Homomorphic Encryption
#10This is only a "Gentle Intro" if you know advanced mathematical notation.
Honestly nothing in this article is even that bad, just some elementary group theory. If you wanted to, you could probably pick it up in a few hours. The math for the HE schemes themselves does rely on some intermediate level number theory though (e.g. Chinese Remainder Theorem in polynomial rings) and of course there's a whole formal language for the security proofs also.