arXiv Science⌕ Search
Home/Archive/arXiv

arXiv · 2510.16873

On the Credibility of Deniable Communication in Court

Jacob Leiken·Sunoo Park
View original source ↗Read source document ↗Export metadata ↓

Abstract

Over time, cryptographically deniable systems have come to be associated in computer-science literature with the idea of "denying" evidence in court - specifically, with the ability to convincingly forge evidence in courtroom scenarios and an inability to authenticate evidence in such contexts. Evidentiary processes in courts, however, have been developed over centuries to account for the reality that evidence has always been forgeable, and relies on factors outside of cryptographic models to seek the truth "as well as possible" while acknowledging that all evidence is imperfect. We argue that deniability does not and need not change this paradigm. Our analysis highlights a gap between technical deniability notions and their application to the real world. There will always be factors outside a cryptographic model that influence perceptions of a message's authenticity, in realistic situations. We propose the broader concept of credibility to capture these factors. The credibility of a system is determined by (1) a threshold of quality that a forgery must pass to be "believable" as an original communication, which varies based on sociotechnical context and threat model, (2) the ease of creating a forgery that passes this threshold, which is also context- and threat-model-dependent, and (3) default system retention policy and retention settings. All three aspects are important for designing secure communication systems for real-world threat models, and some aspects of (2) and (3) may be incorporated directly into technical system design. We hope that our model of credibility will facilitate system design and deployment that addresses threats that are not and cannot be captured by purely technical definitions and existing cryptographic models, and support more nuanced discourse on the strengths and limitations of cryptographic guarantees within specific legal and sociotechnical contexts.

Explore related subjects

cs.CR

Keep this discovery

Explore connections, maps & timelines

BibTeXRIS

Jacob Leiken, Sunoo Park. 2026-01-23. On the Credibility of Deniable Communication in Court. https://doi.org/10.1145/3788646.3789520

Cite the original work for its findings. Save a collection to share your selection of sources.

KEEP EXPLORING

Related papers

arXiv2026

A Survey of Threats Against Voice Authentication and Anti-Spoofing Systems

Voice authentication has undergone significant changes from traditional systems that relied on handcrafted acoustic features to deep learning models that can extract robust speaker embeddings. This advancement has expanded its applications across finance, smart devices, law enforcement, and beyond. However, as adoption has grown, so have the threats. This survey presents a comprehensive review of the modern threat landscape targeting Voice Authentication Systems (VAS) and Anti-Spoofing Countermeasures (CMs), including data poisoning, adversarial, deepfake, and adversarial spoofing attacks. We chronologically trace the development of voice authentication and examine how vulnerabilities have evolved in tandem with technological advancements. For each category of attack, we summarize methodologies, highlight commonly used datasets, compare performance and limitations, and organize existing literature using widely accepted taxonomies. By highlighting emerging risks and open challenges, this survey aims to support the development of more secure and resilient voice authentication systems.

cs.CR↗
arXiv2026

SkillScope: Toward Fine-Grained Least-Privilege Enforcement for Agent Skills

Agent Skills have become a practical way to extend LLM agents by packaging metadata, natural-language instructions, and executable resources into reusable capability bundles. However, this growing Skill ecosystem introduces a new compliance risk: a Skill may perform high-impact actions that fall outside the scope permitted by the user's current request, thereby violating least privilege. Existing skill detection approaches are insufficient for this problem because it is inherently task-conditioned: the same action may be legitimate under one user prompt but over-privileged under another. In this paper, we present SkillScope, a framework for fine-grained least-privilege enforcement in Agent Skills. SkillScope adopts a graph-based analysis approach that models instruction-level procedures and code-level operations as fine-grained action nodes. It extracts potential over-privilege candidates, validates them under graph-instantiated user tasks through runtime analysis, and constrains validated over-privileged actions via control-flow privilege constraining. We evaluate SkillScope through effectiveness experiments and large-scale real-world measurement. SkillScope achieves a 94.53% skill-level F1 score for over-privilege detection. In the wild, SkillScope validates 6,590 of 68,312 valid real-world Skills as exhibiting over-privileged behaviors, showing that least-privilege violations are prevalent in current Skill ecosystems. In the privilege-constraining evaluation, SkillScope reduces triggered over-privileged action-in-task instances by 88.56% while preserving legitimate task completion.

cs.CR↗
arXiv2026

Privacy Auditing with Zero (0) Training Run

Privacy auditing provides empirical lower bounds on the differential privacy parameters of learning algorithms. Existing methods, however, require interventional access to the training pipeline, either to retrain models multiple times or to randomize data inclusion. This is often infeasible for large and opaque deployed systems such as foundation or language models. We introduce Zero-Run privacy auditing, a framework for auditing models post-hoc using two fixed datasets: examples known to be training-set members and examples known to be non-members. In this observational regime, membership is no longer randomized; instead, member and non-member data often differ in distribution, so membership inference scores may reflect a distribution shift rather than algorithmic leakage. Drawing on ideas from causal inference, we formalize this confounding effect and propose two complementary corrections that yield valid privacy audits. Our first approach models the combined effect of distribution shift and algorithmic leakage as an adaptive composition, producing conservative global corrections. Our second approach conditions on observed data and adjusts pointwise membership guesses, yielding sharper instance-dependent bounds. Experiments on synthetic data and large-scale image and text models show that Zero-Run auditing enables practical privacy evaluation when retraining or controlled data insertion is infeasible.

cs.CR↗