The contributed talks committee invites talk proposals to be considered for presentation at the symposium.
The main criteria for acceptance are whether the committee believes that the proposed talk will be of interest to the RWC audience and whether the talk will be good.
This audience typically has broad interests across all areas of real world cryptography, including (but not limited to):
- new applications of cryptography
- novel cryptographic constructs and solutions for real-world problems
- cryptographic deployment challenges
- making cryptography work for users
- social and political aspects of cryptography.
Talk proposals on purely theoretical concerns are unlikely to be accepted to RWC;
there are other excellent IACR venues for work of this type.
As RWC does not have formal proceedings, we accept contributed talk proposals which correspond to papers that are under submission or already published elsewhere.
You are strongly encouraged to read our advice on submitting a talk proposal.
Author Notification
We plan to notify authors of decisions by 2025-01-24.
Please note that submitters will not be provided with formal reviews of their talk proposals.
2024-11-15
Contributed Talks Submission deadline at 23:59 AoE
2025-01-24
Contributed talks notification
2025-03-26
Conference begins
Submission Format
Submissions must comply with the following rules:
- Submissions must be non-anonymous.
- Submissions must clearly specify which author will give the talk. The author identified commits to present the talk at the conference.
- The submission abstract text must provide sufficient detail to explain what the talk will be about.
- Submissions must explain why the proposed talk is a good fit for Real World Crypto.
- Submissions must include an abstract in pdf format of a maximum of three pages + references
- Submissions can include supplementary materials such as full papers (but with a maximum 10 pages,
including references, appendices, etc.), the expected presentation slides, or a link to a previous recording of a talk on the topic.
Supplementary materials must be provided in pdf format or a link to a publicly-accessible video (such as on YouTube)
- We also request a brief biography of the proposed speaker with a focus on their public speaking experience also to audiences beyond cryptography academics;
this could include industry, outreach activities in schools, third-sector/NGOs, informal settings or interdisciplinary audiences.
Submissions that violate any of the above rules will be rejected.
Authors, program committee members, and reviewers must
follow the IACR Policy on Conflicts of Interest, available from https://www.iacr.org/docs/.
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 reviewer and an author have an automatic
COI if:
1 Sharing an institutional affiliation means working at the same location/campus of the same company/university. It does not include separate universities of the same system nor distant locations of the same company.
2 Jointly authored work refers to jointly authored papers and books, whether formally published or just posted online, resulting from collaboration on a scientific problem. It usually does not include joint editorial functions, like a jointly edited proceedings volume. For online publication, the first posting (not revisions) determines the relevant date. Multiple versions of a paper (conference, ePrint, journal) count as a single paper.
3 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.
