Succinct arguments: efficiency, assumptions and trade-offs
Succinct non-interactive arguments (snarks) are cryptographic constructions that allow a prover to convince a verifier about the validity of a statement regarding some computation. We consider these objects from the perspectives of efficiency and assumptions. We modify the folding technique of Bootl...
| Autor: | |
|---|---|
| Tipo de recurso: | tesis doctoral |
| Estado: | Versión publicada |
| Fecha de publicación: | 2022 |
| País: | España |
| Institución: | CBUC, CESCA |
| Repositorio: | TDR. Tesis Doctorales en Red |
| OAI Identifier: | oai:www.tdx.cat:10803/675736 |
| Acceso en línea: | http://hdl.handle.net/10803/675736 |
| Access Level: | acceso abierto |
| Palabra clave: | Cryptography Protocols Zero knowledge proofs Succinct arguments Vector commitments Delegation Criptografía Protocolos Prueba de conocimiento zero Argumentos sucintos Compromisos a vectores Delegación 62 |
| Sumario: | Succinct non-interactive arguments (snarks) are cryptographic constructions that allow a prover to convince a verifier about the validity of a statement regarding some computation. We consider these objects from the perspectives of efficiency and assumptions. We modify the folding technique of Bootle et al. (Eurocrypt 16) to exponentially reduce the verifier’s complexity at the expense of an updatable setup instead of a transparent one. Next, we construct a delegation scheme –which is a snark for efficiently decidable languages– using simple and well understood cryptographic assumptions. On the verification side, the construction competes in efficiency constructions that use “non-standard” assumptions. Furthermore, we consider other cryptographic constructions that are relevant to snarks. First, we explore vector commitments and consider combinatorial techniques to construct them. One of our constructions allows flexible time/memory tradeoffs. Second, we introduce folding schemes with selective verification which allows a prover to amortize the cost of producing multiple proofs addressed to different verifiers. |
|---|