4

Alice wants to share a secret $S$ with Bob so she encrypts it with Bob's public key.

Bob is not online at the moment so Victor will keep it safe for him in the meantime.

Victor the verifier would like to verify the ciphertext is indeed the secret $S$ without actually knowing the secret $S$ himself. Victor can reliably know the hash of the secret $S$ (details of how he can rely on the hash are not relevant here). Victor could also have any other kind of commitment, it need not be a hash, provided he can never deduce the secret in plain text.

Alice does this

encryptedSecret = encrypt(secret, bobsPublicKey)

Victor does this

verify(encryptedSecret, hashOfSecret) => true
verify("anything else", hashOfSecret) => false

Does such a verify function exist?

david_adler
  • 173
  • 8

3 Answers3

2

At a high level, we know that a zksnark can be created so that it proves that a publicly known output $z$ is the result of applying a publicly known function $\text{f}$ to a sef of private (i.e., secret) inputs $x_1, x_2, ...$, namely $z= \text{f}(x_1,x_2,...)$.

Under the hood, what the zksnark is actually doing is prove a set of constraints (each constraint is a simple arithmetic statement that is true or false), so that the full set of constraints is true if and only if the public output is correctly calculated from the private input.

So the machinery of the zksnark (e.g., a zksnark circuit compiler such as Circom) makes it simple for us to add additional constraints that implement the desired logic of the full problem to be solved. Here, we want to also prove that the secret $S$ hashes to a publicly known value for the hash of the secret, $H = \text{Hash}(S)$. For example, maybe $S$ is the private key for a blockchain wallet, $H$ is the publicly known wallet address owned by that private key, and $\text{Hash}$ is the method to compute the wallet address from the private key.

So the zksnark should have a system of constraints that implement the following: $$H - \text{Hash}(S) == 0 \\ \text{encryptedSecret} - \text{f}(S, \text{salt}) == 0 $$

Here, the function $f$ is the encryption function that encrypts the secret using Bob's public key, and $\text{salt}$ is the salt/nullifier that could be optionally included to prevent replay attacks, double spends, etc.

In a possible implementation, $\text{f}$ and $\text{Hash}$ are published functions, $H$ is a public input to the zksnark and is known to be the correct hash of the secret $S$, $S$ and $\text{salt}$ are private inputs to the zksnark, and $\text{encryptedSecret}$ is the public output of the zksnark. The zksnark is configured to prove that the constraints above are satisfied, which means that Alice knows a secret $S$ and a $\text{salt}$ which satisfy the constraints and produce the encrypted output $\text{encryptedSecret}$.

Victor the verifier can then run the standard verifier algorithm for the zksnark, to verify that the full logic has been satisfied.

(Note: the original question had a typo in "Alice wants to share a secret with Bob so she encrypts it with Bob's private key", as it should say "encrypts it with Bob's public key".)

sunfishstanford
  • 66
  • 4
0

Private verification of a Sudoku solution, Bowe-Maxwell talk and a bitcoin transaction at Financial Crypto 2016 workshop.

The problem solved with verification was:

  1. buyer is reluctant to sent his coins first, at risk of receiving random bits;
  2. seller is reluctant to send his solution to the puzzle first, at risk of receiving no reward.

A non-interactive proof was introduced and implemented to verify that:

  1. the plaintext is a valid Sudoku solution to the puzzle at hand;
  2. the ciphertext was produced with a key;
  3. the key is a pre-image to the hash value, that was sent to the buyer with the ciphertext.

This hash could be used to create HTLC transaction so that the seller would claim his coins only by publishing the key on the blockchain. Well actually a script was used, but lets stick to HTLC as a simplification.

The short practical answer is: one would verify a hash preimage with a zkSNARK proof. Another (general) answer is, an interactive proof system exists for any NP language.

A shameless ad: an alternative Sudoku solution verification circuit was designed, starting from polynomial set representation and "playing cards" solution of Naor, presented at IEEE ATIT 2019.

https://github.com/vadym-f/Sudoku_solvability_proof/tree/master/IEEE_ATIT_2019

Vadym Fedyukovych
  • 2,347
  • 14
  • 19
0

There is a ZK-STARK that proves you know the preimage to a value. "The Rescue-Hash statement proven by the prover given in this code is:

"I know a sequence of n + 1 inputs {w_i} such that H(...H(H(w_0, w_1), w_2) ..., w_n) = p"

where:

H is the Rescue hash function.
Each w_i is a 4-tuple of field elements. These are private inputs, known only to the prover.
p is the public output of the hash (which also consists of 4 field elements).

" https://github.com/starkware-libs/ethSTARK/tree/ziggy

Eyal Ronen
  • 1
  • 1