[viff-devel] FW: Bug in ViFF

[Mikkel Krøigård]

> Tomas is right, of course. For the passive case, using the first 2t+1 players
> always works, and for the active case, we do not use the
> local-multiply-and-reshare method anyway.
The thing is, I always just assumed that we always used the same set of shares,
and it is kind of easy to miss if you just read quickly through it - it says
what you expect. I guess that's why we all missed it until now.

The unit tests should not be hardcoded to n=3, t=1 as they are now, because
that's why we never found the problem in the first place. I can rewrite the
unit tests to the general setting. It needs to be done.