Content pfp
Content
@
0 reply
0 recast
0 reaction

Vitalik Buterin pfp
Vitalik Buterin
@vitalik.eth
When debugging a ZKP verifier, make sure to keep checking not just that the proof verifies on valid inputs, but also that the proof verification returns an error on invalid inputs (or with nonsensical tweaks to the verification mechanism).
77 replies
947 recasts
5016 reactions

Emmanuel Awosika  pfp
Emmanuel Awosika
@eawosika
I guess this is how you catch unconstrained circuit bugs? I can imagine there's some proof circuit that checks that the square of a number is 9, but doesn’t check if it should be 3 or -3. What you're suggesting here should catch the bug if we only want it to be 3, no?
1 reply
0 recast
15 reactions

EulerLagrangodamus pfp
EulerLagrangodamus
@eulerlagrange
Hey Vitalik would you like to do an AMA on here sometime?
4 replies
42 recasts
304 reactions

0xqeew  pfp
0xqeew
@0xqeew
In zk proofs, there are (2) actors : prover and a verifier. The prover convince the verifier without revealing any information. The verifier verify that the prover is telling the truth. A ZKP verifier must reject both invalid proofs and those with tampered verification.
0 reply
4 recasts
35 reactions

Jen_NY🟣 pfp
Jen_NY🟣
@skylen.eth
Great point, @vitalik.eth! Ensuring that a ZKP verifier properly rejects invalid inputs is crucial for maintaining security and integrity. It's not just about accepting the right proofs, but also about robustly identifying the wrong ones. 🔍🛡️
5 replies
6 recasts
24 reactions

Majid pfp
Majid
@0xmajidx0
true
0 reply
1 recast
13 reactions

non 🐹 pfp
non 🐹
@non07777.eth
Yes, sir, I will🫡
0 reply
1 recast
13 reactions

WOO🎩 pfp
WOO🎩
@woo-x
Yes sir thx Legend 🙇‍♂️
0 reply
1 recast
11 reactions

Emp pfp
Emp
@empathicalchemy
I think the core of this, is crucial in so many things. Look for the truths in things, the provable, but also the untruths, the unproven. 10 $DEGEN
0 reply
1 recast
5 reactions

pgpg pfp
pgpg
@pgpg.eth
I mean. That's just general testing advice sir.
0 reply
0 recast
4 reactions

Giancarlo🎩 pfp
Giancarlo🎩
@giancarlodc.eth
Good unit tests should be able to take care of that or am I missing something? Still, ensuring to cover all these use cases is what I am calling “good” unit tests.
0 reply
0 recast
4 reactions

Ben Green pfp
Ben Green
@numtel
I feel like this message is a direct response to snarkjs and its lack of testing. This pr is in the new 0.7.4 and it has no test that fails before the patch. https://github.com/iden3/snarkjs/pull/480
1 reply
0 recast
0 reaction

D.K. pfp
D.K.
@unicross.eth
Real v god?
0 reply
0 recast
0 reaction

Anatole pfp
Anatole
@anatoles
fantastic
0 reply
0 recast
0 reaction

Minhng83 pfp
Minhng83
@minhng83
Zk is end game
0 reply
0 recast
0 reaction

Puppy pfp
Puppy
@puppyx
Got it
0 reply
0 recast
0 reaction

MCLUHAN VIDEOS YOUTUBE pfp
MCLUHAN VIDEOS YOUTUBE
@mcluhanvideos
can we extend this to the topic of video index tokens, where human beings perform the exact confirmation or chain, a verificationary human blockchain?
0 reply
0 recast
0 reaction

cryptoleon.base.eth pfp
cryptoleon.base.eth
@cryptoleonnl.eth
Good insight 👌🏻
0 reply
0 recast
0 reaction

Amarantha pfp
Amarantha
@amarantha
incredible
0 reply
0 recast
0 reaction

Zzmas pfp
Zzmas
@zzmas
👏🏻
0 reply
0 recast
0 reaction