Choosing a Framework
Decision Graph
A heuristic, first-stage filter for narrowing down which region of the taxonomy fits your application — answer a few questions about your deployment to see representative frameworks.
Recommended region
This is a first-stage filter, not a final answer — check the Framework Explorer and Cost Analysis tables for party count, supported operations, and communication cost detail.
Full Decision Graph (All Paths)
Every question and outcome in the graph above, for reference or linking directly to a specific branch.
Question 1
Which deployment model best matches the application?
- Client-Server → continue to Question 2
- Outsourcing → continue to Question 3
Question 2
Which performance objective dominates?
- Low-latency → Low-latency hybrid protocols: HE for linear layers; GC/FSS/SS for non-linearities.
- High-throughput/Mixed → continue to Question 4
Question 3
Can the computing parties assume an honest majority?
- No → continue to Question 4
- Yes → continue to Question 5
Question 4
Is semi-honest security sufficient?
- Yes → continue to Question 6
- No → MAC-based protocols: dishonest majority with authenticated shares; distributed preprocessing; one-sided malicious security possible.
Question 5
Can the application support function-dependent preprocessing?
- No → Online-only or f-independent preprocessing: security varies.
- Yes → f-dependent preprocessing: security varies.
Question 6
Are the MPC parties computationally constrained?
- No → FSS-based protocols: computational overhead, constant-round communication; dealer-based preprocessing possible.
- Yes → continue to Question 7
Question 7
Can the protocol rely on a preprocessing dealer?
- Yes → Commodity-based protocols: dealer-based preprocessing.
- No → SS-based protocols: lightweight computation, heavier communication.