New answers tagged

1 vote
Accepted

Proof of equality without involving Peggy after the fact

Does such a proving protocol exist? I'm not certain what each 'proof' is supposed to prove, and so I'm make a simple suggestion that appears to meet the end goal. Suppose we have a pairing friendly ...
  • 135k
1 vote
Accepted

How much Computer Science theory needs to be learnt for learning zkSnarks & what is a good book for it?

I met the same importance of Computation Theory while dealing with ZKPs... (by the way, I would start from ZKP if you still don't master them before going on with zkSNARKs) About CT prerequisites, I ...
  • 518
1 vote
Accepted

computationally unbounded strategy of prover in zero knowledge proofs

To add to baro77's answer: What are the reasons for the prover to have more computational power than the verifier? If the prover in an interactive protocol has the same power as the verifier, then ...
  • 4,603
1 vote

computationally unbounded strategy of prover in zero knowledge proofs

It's just the general case, Goldreich's point of view deals with foundations, so he doesn't restrict Prover's computational power... however going on you'll meet a "soundness-relaxed" ...
  • 518
1 vote
Accepted

The significance of rewinding a simulation in an ZK interactive proof

I assume that the transcript of the simulation doesn't contain the repeated/uncorrected iterations of each try... all the tries where verifier had to use the time machines to reverse wouldn't be ...
  • 3,917
0 votes

Universal Dynamic Accumulators : all parties know keys p and q. Is the original set needed to validate set membership and non membership?

As a general rule of thumb: In RSA, everyone with the factorization p and q can do everything, except calculating dlogs. If you spread that knowledge over multiple parties, you can skip RSA entirely: ...
  • 12.3k
1 vote
Accepted

Can zk-SNARK be used in proofs that are not NP problems?

The comment by @Maeher states that the language you're considering is in NP. However, a direct answer to your question is: We do not currently have zk-SNARKs for languages beyond NP. What we do have ...
  • 363
1 vote

Privacy-conserving prover delegation in ZKP

You can sometimes partition the witness into a part that needs the full generality of a zk proof system, and a part consisting just of private keys that the prover must demonstrate that they know. ...
1 vote
Accepted

Achieving consensus on a value with peers that can cheat or collude

First off, I think that any (purely) cryptographic solution to this will be completely unable to address these threat models: What if you want to muddy the waters by secretly serving ...
1 vote

Achieving consensus on a value with peers that can cheat or collude

Any such scheme will be just as dependent on a "central authority" as "sign the value + a timestamp by the webpage that is doing the publishing", given that said "central ...
  • 121

Top 50 recent answers are included