On probabilistic versus deterministic provers in the definition of proofs of knowledge

Mihir Bellare; Oded Goldreich

doi:https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-642-22670-0_14

On probabilistic versus deterministic provers in the definition of proofs of knowledge

Mihir Bellare, Oded Goldreich

Department of Computer Science and Applied Mathematics

Weizmann Institute of Science

Research output: Chapter in Book/Report/Conference proceeding › Chapter › peer-review

Abstract

This article points out a gap between two natural formulations of the concept of a proof of knowledge, and shows that in all natural cases (e.g., NP-statements) this gap can be bridged. The aforementioned formulations differ by whether they refer to (all possible) probabilistic or deterministic prover strategies. Unlike in the rest of cryptography, in the current context, the obvious transformation of probabilistic strategies to deterministic strategies does not seem to suffice per se. The source of trouble is "bad interaction" between the expectation operator and other operators, which appear in the definition of a proof of knowledge (reviewed here).

Original language	English
Title of host publication	Studies in Complexity and Cryptography
Subtitle of host publication	Miscellanea on the Interplay between Randomness and Computation
Editors	Oded Goldreich
Chapter	14
Pages	114-123
Number of pages	10
DOIs	https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-642-22670-0_14
State	Published - 2011

Publication series

Name	Lecture Notes in Computer Science (including subseries Lecture Notes in Artificial Intelligence and Lecture Notes in Bioinformatics)
Volume	6650 LNCS

All Science Journal Classification (ASJC) codes

Theoretical Computer Science
General Computer Science

Access to Document

https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-642-22670-0_14

Cite this

Bellare, M., & Goldreich, O. (2011). On probabilistic versus deterministic provers in the definition of proofs of knowledge. In O. Goldreich (Ed.), Studies in Complexity and Cryptography: Miscellanea on the Interplay between Randomness and Computation (pp. 114-123). (Lecture Notes in Computer Science (including subseries Lecture Notes in Artificial Intelligence and Lecture Notes in Bioinformatics); Vol. 6650 LNCS). https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-642-22670-0_14

Bellare, Mihir ; Goldreich, Oded. / On probabilistic versus deterministic provers in the definition of proofs of knowledge. Studies in Complexity and Cryptography: Miscellanea on the Interplay between Randomness and Computation. editor / Oded Goldreich. 2011. pp. 114-123 (Lecture Notes in Computer Science (including subseries Lecture Notes in Artificial Intelligence and Lecture Notes in Bioinformatics)).

@inbook{9793b569ce4c417189660df30fdb7163,

title = "On probabilistic versus deterministic provers in the definition of proofs of knowledge",

abstract = "This article points out a gap between two natural formulations of the concept of a proof of knowledge, and shows that in all natural cases (e.g., NP-statements) this gap can be bridged. The aforementioned formulations differ by whether they refer to (all possible) probabilistic or deterministic prover strategies. Unlike in the rest of cryptography, in the current context, the obvious transformation of probabilistic strategies to deterministic strategies does not seem to suffice per se. The source of trouble is {"}bad interaction{"} between the expectation operator and other operators, which appear in the definition of a proof of knowledge (reviewed here).",

author = "Mihir Bellare and Oded Goldreich",

year = "2011",

doi = "https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-642-22670-0_14",

language = "الإنجليزيّة",

isbn = "9783642226694",

series = "Lecture Notes in Computer Science (including subseries Lecture Notes in Artificial Intelligence and Lecture Notes in Bioinformatics)",

pages = "114--123",

editor = "Oded Goldreich",

booktitle = "Studies in Complexity and Cryptography",

}

Bellare, M & Goldreich, O 2011, On probabilistic versus deterministic provers in the definition of proofs of knowledge. in O Goldreich (ed.), Studies in Complexity and Cryptography: Miscellanea on the Interplay between Randomness and Computation. Lecture Notes in Computer Science (including subseries Lecture Notes in Artificial Intelligence and Lecture Notes in Bioinformatics), vol. 6650 LNCS, pp. 114-123. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-642-22670-0_14

On probabilistic versus deterministic provers in the definition of proofs of knowledge. / Bellare, Mihir; Goldreich, Oded.
Studies in Complexity and Cryptography: Miscellanea on the Interplay between Randomness and Computation. ed. / Oded Goldreich. 2011. p. 114-123 (Lecture Notes in Computer Science (including subseries Lecture Notes in Artificial Intelligence and Lecture Notes in Bioinformatics); Vol. 6650 LNCS).

Research output: Chapter in Book/Report/Conference proceeding › Chapter › peer-review

TY - CHAP

T1 - On probabilistic versus deterministic provers in the definition of proofs of knowledge

AU - Bellare, Mihir

AU - Goldreich, Oded

PY - 2011

Y1 - 2011

N2 - This article points out a gap between two natural formulations of the concept of a proof of knowledge, and shows that in all natural cases (e.g., NP-statements) this gap can be bridged. The aforementioned formulations differ by whether they refer to (all possible) probabilistic or deterministic prover strategies. Unlike in the rest of cryptography, in the current context, the obvious transformation of probabilistic strategies to deterministic strategies does not seem to suffice per se. The source of trouble is "bad interaction" between the expectation operator and other operators, which appear in the definition of a proof of knowledge (reviewed here).

AB - This article points out a gap between two natural formulations of the concept of a proof of knowledge, and shows that in all natural cases (e.g., NP-statements) this gap can be bridged. The aforementioned formulations differ by whether they refer to (all possible) probabilistic or deterministic prover strategies. Unlike in the rest of cryptography, in the current context, the obvious transformation of probabilistic strategies to deterministic strategies does not seem to suffice per se. The source of trouble is "bad interaction" between the expectation operator and other operators, which appear in the definition of a proof of knowledge (reviewed here).

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=84857597126&partnerID=8YFLogxK

U2 - https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-642-22670-0_14

DO - https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-642-22670-0_14

M3 - فصل

SN - 9783642226694

T3 - Lecture Notes in Computer Science (including subseries Lecture Notes in Artificial Intelligence and Lecture Notes in Bioinformatics)

SP - 114

EP - 123

BT - Studies in Complexity and Cryptography

A2 - Goldreich, Oded

ER -

Bellare M, Goldreich O. On probabilistic versus deterministic provers in the definition of proofs of knowledge. In Goldreich O, editor, Studies in Complexity and Cryptography: Miscellanea on the Interplay between Randomness and Computation. 2011. p. 114-123. (Lecture Notes in Computer Science (including subseries Lecture Notes in Artificial Intelligence and Lecture Notes in Bioinformatics)). doi: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-642-22670-0_14

On probabilistic versus deterministic provers in the definition of proofs of knowledge

Abstract

Publication series

All Science Journal Classification (ASJC) codes

Access to Document

Other files and links

Fingerprint

Cite this