A multi-party protocol for constructing the public parameters of the Pinocchio zk-SNARK

156 citations recorded by the source corpus.

How researchers see this paper

The researchers whose trusted networks rank it highest, strongest advocate first. Every researcher gets a different order.

Bulletproofs: Short Proofs for Confidential Transactions and More (2018, background): “However, they have highly complex common reference strings which require lengthy and computationally intensive protocols [41] to generate distributively.”
Zero-Knowledge Contingent Payments Revisited: Attacks and Payments for Services (2017, methodology): “A similar approach was followed by the designers of Zcash [9, 19] to remove a trusted generation of the CRS in their the QAP-based SNARKs4.”
Privacy-Preserving Solutions for Blockchain: Review and Challenges (2019, unknown): “In this direction, [118] proposed a multi-party protocol for constructing the public parameters of the Pinocchio zk-SNARK [95], which is the baseline for Zcash [17].”
zkLedger: Privacy-Preserving Auditing for Distributed Ledgers (2018, background): “, by distributing the setup between multiple parties [8, 11, 12], this process is onerous and expensive.”
Aurora: Transparent Succinct Arguments for R1CS (2019, background): “When using cryptographic proofs in distributed systems, relying on a central party negates the benefits of distributed trust and, even though it is invoked only once in a system’s life, a party trusted by all users typically does not exist! The responsibility for generating parameters can in princip”