
Protocols for securely testing the equality of two encrypted integers are common building blocks for a number of proposals in the literature that aim for privacy preservation. Being used repeatedly in many cryptographic protocols, designing efficient equality testing protocols is important in terms of computation and communication overhead. In this work, we consider a scenario with two parties where party A has two integers encrypted using an additively homomorphic scheme and party B has the decryption key. Party A would like to obtain an encrypted bit that shows whether the integers are equal or not but nothing more. We propose three secure equality testing protocols, which are more efficient in terms of communication, computation or both compared to the existing work. To support our claims, we present experimental results, which show that our protocols achieve up to 99% computation-wise improvement compared to the state-of-the-art protocols in a fair experimental set-up.
Encrypted data, Efficiency, Historic preservation, Cryptographic protocols, Data handling, Homomorphic encryption, Privacy preservation, Communication overheads, Privacy, Processing encrypted data, Cryptography, Equality tests, Equality-testing protocol, Equality test, State-of-the art protocols, Data privacy, Ho-momorphic encryptions
Encrypted data, Efficiency, Historic preservation, Cryptographic protocols, Data handling, Homomorphic encryption, Privacy preservation, Communication overheads, Privacy, Processing encrypted data, Cryptography, Equality tests, Equality-testing protocol, Equality test, State-of-the art protocols, Data privacy, Ho-momorphic encryptions
| selected citations These citations are derived from selected sources. This is an alternative to the "Influence" indicator, which also reflects the overall/total impact of an article in the research community at large, based on the underlying citation network (diachronically). | 5 | |
| popularity This indicator reflects the "current" impact/attention (the "hype") of an article in the research community at large, based on the underlying citation network. | Top 10% | |
| influence This indicator reflects the overall/total impact of an article in the research community at large, based on the underlying citation network (diachronically). | Average | |
| impulse This indicator reflects the initial momentum of an article directly after its publication, based on the underlying citation network. | Average |
