  A protocol for computing a functionality is secure if an adversary in this
protocol cannot cause more harm than in an ideal computation where parties give
their inputs to a trusted party which returns the output of the functionality
to all parties. In particular, in the ideal model such computation is fair --
all parties get the output. Cleve (STOC 1986) proved that, in general, fairness
is not possible without an honest majority. To overcome this impossibility,
Gordon and Katz (Eurocrypt 2010) suggested a relaxed definition -- 1/p-secure
computation -- which guarantees partial fairness. For two parties, they
construct 1/p-secure protocols for functionalities for which the size of either
their domain or their range is polynomial (in the security parameter). Gordon
and Katz ask whether their results can be extended to multiparty protocols.
  We study 1/p-secure protocols in the multiparty setting for general
functionalities. Our main result is constructions of 1/p-secure protocols when
the number of parties is constant provided that less than 2/3 of the parties
are corrupt. Our protocols require that either (1) the functionality is
deterministic and the size of the domain is polynomial (in the security
parameter), or (2) the functionality can be randomized and the size of the
range is polynomial. If the size of the domain is constant and the
functionality is deterministic, then our protocol is efficient even when the
number of parties is O(log log n) (where n is the security parameter). On the
negative side, we show that when the number of parties is super-constant,
1/p-secure protocols are not possible when the size of the domain is
polynomial.
