You signed in with another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.You signed out in another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.You switched accounts on another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.Dismiss alert
One of the commonly advertised use cases for ZKProofs is the following:
I can prove to you that I have some secret S, where f(S) = X, without revealing the secret to you.
Most of the examples in the examples/ directory showcase "proving a result of some computation, so that the verifier doesn't have to redo the calculation again".
On the secrets front, there's the rsa example which comes close to what I have in mind but is different. In the rsa example, inside of the "program" which is our provable computation, we do roughly the following:
let pk = read_public_key();let sig = read_signature();let msg = read_signed_msg();let valid_sig = RsaVerifySig(pk, sig, msg);
sp1_zkvm::io::commit(&valid_sig);
However, one can check whether an RSA signature is valid without using ZKProofs. I think it'd be interesting to showcase the ability of ZKProof to not reveal anything secret through proving roughly the following:
One of the commonly advertised use cases for ZKProofs is the following:
I can prove to you that I have some secret
S
, wheref(S) = X
, without revealing the secret to you.Most of the examples in the
examples/
directory showcase "proving a result of some computation, so that the verifier doesn't have to redo the calculation again".On the secrets front, there's the
rsa
example which comes close to what I have in mind but is different. In thersa
example, inside of the "program" which is our provable computation, we do roughly the following:However, one can check whether an RSA signature is valid without using ZKProofs. I think it'd be interesting to showcase the ability of ZKProof to not reveal anything secret through proving roughly the following:
This way we could prove that we have access to a
private_key
without generating any signatures through RSA.Thanks for reading through my issue, let me know what you think!
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: