Submissions must be at most 30 pages appendices and references, and using the Springer LNCS format (in particular, and must be in a single column format in 10pt fonts using the default llncs class without adjustments. Details on the Springer LNCS format can be obtained here. Additional material (datasets, code, long machine proofs, etc.) can be submitted as separate file. Reviewers are not required to read appendices and additional material, and submissions are expected to be intelligible and complete without them.
The review process is double-blinded. The submission should begin with a title, a short abstract, and a list of key words. Its introduction should summarize the contributions of the paper at a level appropriate for a non-specialist reader. Submissions ignoring these guidelines may be rejected without further consideration. All papers must be submitted with a meaningful abstract by the initial submission deadline. This is a firm deadline. Papers not registered by this deadline will not be considered. Authors may update or withdraw their submission at any time between the initial and final submission deadline.
Submissions not meeting these guidelines risk rejection
without consideration of their merits.
Abstract submission deadline
Full paper submission deadline
First round notification
Rebuttal deadline
Final notification
Final versions due
Conference begins
Further details are
available on the paper submission page.
For papers that are accepted, the length of the proceedings version will be at most 35 pages using Springer’s standard fonts, font sizes, and margins, excluding references. The additional material will not be part of the conference proceedings.
Submissions must not substantially duplicate work that any of the authors has published in a journal or a conference/workshop with proceedings, or has submitted/is planning to submit before the author notification deadline to a journal or other conferences/workshops that have proceedings.
Articles will not be reviewed by reviewers who have a conflict of interest with at least one author of the submission. Submissions must adhere to the IACR Policy on Conflicts of Interest.
Authors, program committee members, and reviewers must follow the IACR Policy on Conflicts of Interest, available from https://www.iacr.org/docs/conflicts.pdf.
In particular, the authors of each submission are asked during the submission process to identify all members of the Program Committee who have an automatic conflict of interest (COI) with the submission. A reviewer1 has an automatic COI with an author if:
A reviewer has an automatic COI with a submission if:
Any further COIs of importance should be separately disclosed. It is the responsibility of all authors to ensure correct reporting of COI information. Submissions with incorrect or incomplete COI information may be rejected without consideration of their merits.
COIs are not restricted to automatic ones, others being possible. COIs beyond automatic COIs could involve financial, intellectual, or personal interests. Examples include closely related technical work, cooperation in the form of joint projects or grant applications, business relationships, close personal friendships, instances of personal enmity. Full transparency is of utmost importance, authors and reviewers must disclose to the chairs or editor any circumstances that they think may create bias, even if it does not raise to the level of a COI. The editor or program chair will decide if such circumstances should be treated as a COI.