Broadcast Encryption (BE) allows a sender to send an encrypted message to multiple receivers. In a typical broadcast encryption scenario, the broadcaster decides the set of users who can decrypt a particular ciphertext (denoted as the privileged set). Gritti et al. (IJIS'16) introduced a new primitive called Broadcast Encryption with Dealership (BrED), where the dealer decides the privileged set. A BrED scheme allows a dealer to buy content from the broadcaster and sell it to users. It provides better flexibility in managing a large user base. To date, quite a few different constructions of BrED schemes have been proposed by the research community.

We find that all existing BrED schemes are insecure under the existing security definitions. We demonstrate a concrete attack on all the existing schemes in the purview of the existing security definition. We also find that the security definitions proposed in the state-of-the-art BrED schemes do not capture the real world. We argue about the inadequacy of existing definitions and propose a new security definition that models the real world more closely. Finally, we propose a new BrED construction and prove it to be secure in our newly proposed security model.

Verifiable secret sharing (VSS) protocols enable parties to share secrets while guaranteeing security (in particular, that all parties hold valid and consistent shares) even if the dealer or some of the participants are malicious. Most work on VSS focuses on the honest majority case, primarily since it enables one to guarantee output delivery (e.g., a corrupted recipient cannot prevent an honest dealer from sharing their value). Feldman's VSS is a well known and popular protocol for this task and relies on the discrete log hardness assumption. In this paper, we present a variant of Feldman's VSS for the dishonest majority setting and formally prove its security. Beyond the basic VSS protocol, we present a publicly-verifiable version, as well as show how to securely add participants to the sharing and how to refresh an existing sharing (all secure in the presence of a dishonest majority). We prove that our protocols are UC secure, for appropriately defined ideal functionalities.