Vendetta (0xvendetta)

FHE is not cheap. Operations on ciphertexts are thousands of times slower than on plaintexts although @zama's optimizations are cutting that gap fast. What's the trade-off?🤔 You get deterministic privacy. With zero-knowledge proofs or MPC, you rely on distributed protocols and assumptions about the participant's honesty. With FHE, you rely solely on math. Specifically, the hardness of lattice problems. Zama’s roadmap focuses on: • Reducing bootstrapping costs • Leveraging GPU acceleration • Compiling high-level code to optimized FHE circuits automatically It’s not yet for every app, but for privacy-critical workloads, like encrypted AI inference or private blockchain contracts. It is the cleanest guarantee we have.

• 0 replies
• 0 recasts
• 2 reactions

recast:farcaster://casts/0x7fe4c68e7928bc0da08475570bbe21aefb985b812e671ae3f1f5f7012c5693fc

• 0 replies
• 0 recasts
• 0 reactions

recast:farcaster://casts/0xa32cef78c337657df7c547bccbcd999c090873acfa8e7b014daa118c0a1da35b

• 0 replies
• 0 recasts
• 0 reactions

🧮The Math Behind Zama’s Post-Quantum Confidence When people think of “quantum computers,” they often think of a future where super computers have the ability to break all forms of encryption. It is not that simple but it is not fiction either. Quantum computers, if they ever scale, could easily break many of the systems that protect data today, like RSA and elliptic-curve cryptography. That is because those systems depend on mathematical problems (like factoring large numbers) that quantum algorithms can solve much faster than today's computers. @zama’s Fully Homomorphic Encryption doesn’t rely on those problems. It is built on something different. A branch of math called lattice-based cryptography. Here’s a rough way to picture it👇 Imagine a giant 3D grid of points extending in every direction, that’s a lattice. Now imagine hiding your secret somewhere deep within that grid.

• 1 reply
• 0 recasts
• 0 reactions