Re: Is this simple scheme secure?
From: NYC (name_at_company.com)
Date: 01/31/04
- Next message: George: "Best secure surfing solution"
- Previous message: Necrotica: "Re: question"
- In reply to: Gregory G Rose: "Re: Is this simple scheme secure?"
- Next in thread: Tim Smith: "Re: Is this simple scheme secure?"
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ] [ attachment ]
Date: Sat, 31 Jan 2004 01:40:17 +0100
Thanks for the replies everyone, this certainly helped clear things up!
When I get the time, I would really like to get an understanding of how
this works, because it really sounds fascinating.
Gregory G Rose wrote:
> In article <q%zSb.80748$dP1.206618@newsc.telia.net>,
> Foo Bar <foobar965@hotmail.com> wrote:
>
>>It can be used for things like "I know a n-coloring of this graph" or "I
>>know an isomorphism between these two graphs". I don't know the area
>>well enough to comment on the case of more general secrets.
>
>
> Zero Knowledge Proofs are truly magical stuff. The
> problem is it's almost impossible to understand
> without reading the literature. The hash example
> presented earlier in this thread isn't
> zero-knowledeg, because A can go offline and
> verify guesses about M... information about M came
> back from B.
>
> Anything that can be proven can be proven in the
> zero-knowledge framework; that is one of the
> relatively surprising (to me, anyway) results. But
> not necessarily efficiently...
>
> Greg.
- Next message: George: "Best secure surfing solution"
- Previous message: Necrotica: "Re: question"
- In reply to: Gregory G Rose: "Re: Is this simple scheme secure?"
- Next in thread: Tim Smith: "Re: Is this simple scheme secure?"
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ] [ attachment ]
Relevant Pages
|