You signed in with another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.You signed out in another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.You switched accounts on another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.Dismiss alert
Hi akosba, I am learning about RSAEncryptionCircuitGenerator and I would appreciate if you could please clarify the following questions.
My idea is that for RSA zero-knowledge proof, the privKey and the plainText should be private input, the pubKey and the cipherText should be public input. The prover can use the private input and the public input to generate proof, and the verifier can only use the public input and proof to verify (pk, vk are ignored here). But I don't understand much about this generator. This class has only private inputinputMessage and randomness, while cipherText is used as output. What I want to ask is, is the pubKey (and the cipherText) not needed here as public input, in other words, is this circuit making a commitment to inputMessage and randomness in RSA rather than the entire encryption process?
In addition, if one has the value of public input, how can one recover the primary_input in libsnark to achieve validation without the verifier knowing the private input?
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered:
Hi akosba, I am learning about
RSAEncryptionCircuitGenerator
and I would appreciate if you could please clarify the following questions.My idea is that for RSA zero-knowledge proof, the privKey and the plainText should be private input, the pubKey and the cipherText should be public input. The prover can use the private input and the public input to generate proof, and the verifier can only use the public input and proof to verify (pk, vk are ignored here). But I don't understand much about this generator. This class has only private input
inputMessage
andrandomness
, while cipherText is used as output. What I want to ask is, is the pubKey (and the cipherText) not needed here as public input, in other words, is this circuit making a commitment toinputMessage
andrandomness
in RSA rather than the entire encryption process?In addition, if one has the value of public input, how can one recover the
primary_input
in libsnark to achieve validation without the verifier knowing the private input?The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: