zk framework ppt #28

avradip · 2022-01-05T06:48:45Z

No description provided.

brentzundel · 2022-01-05T19:23:17Z

Looks like you need to sign off on your commit: https://github.com/hyperledger/ursa-rfcs/pull/28/checks?check_run_id=4711411658

Signed-off-by: Avradip Mandal <[email protected]>

avradip · 2022-01-05T20:11:25Z

Hi Brent, Thanks for pointing that out. Now it should be fixed. Avradip

…

On Wed, Jan 5, 2022 at 11:23 AM Brent Zundel ***@***.***> wrote: Looks like you need to sign off on your commit: https://github.com/hyperledger/ursa-rfcs/pull/28/checks?check_run_id=4711411658 — Reply to this email directly, view it on GitHub <#28 (comment)>, or unsubscribe <https://github.com/notifications/unsubscribe-auth/AAAUA326VM6VYM6XZWRBLBLUUSLDDANCNFSM5LJFALBA> . Triage notifications on the go with GitHub Mobile for iOS <https://apps.apple.com/app/apple-store/id1477376905?ct=notification-email&mt=8&pt=524675> or Android <https://play.google.com/store/apps/details?id=com.github.android&referrer=utm_campaign%3Dnotification-email%26utm_medium%3Demail%26utm_source%3Dgithub>. You are receiving this because you authored the thread.Message ID: ***@***.***>

brentzundel · 2022-01-05T20:24:49Z

0000-zk-framework.md

+
+We have chosen r1cs-select as frontend, which might not be preferred frontend for all users.
+
+# Rationale and alternatives


I would like to see some content in this section

Addressed in the new commit

brentzundel · 2022-01-05T20:25:27Z

0000-zk-framework.md

+
+zk-interface is the defacto prior art. It has extensive features. However, it is not being actively maintained and set up is relatively complex.
+
+# Unresolved questions


This section as well should be filled out

Addressed in the new commit

dcmiddle · 2022-01-05T21:48:55Z

0000-zk-framework.md

+[reference-level-explanation]: #reference-level-explanation
+
+main.rs: this file contains sample code on how to use the framework, get_circuit function defines the circuit for which zero knowledge proofs will be generated
+r1csbellman.rs, r1csbulletproof.rs: modules that convert r1cs spec to underlying backends


can you include a normative r1cs definition and/or spec?

Addressed in the new commit

dcmiddle · 2022-01-05T21:49:21Z

0000-zk-framework.md

+# Drawbacks
+[drawbacks]: #drawbacks
+
+We have chosen r1cs-select as frontend, which might not be preferred frontend for all users.


please provide an r1cs-select reference

Addressed in the new commit

dcmiddle · 2022-01-05T21:50:24Z

0000-zk-framework.md

+# Prior art
+[prior-art]: #prior-art
+
+zk-interface is the defacto prior art. It has extensive features. However, it is not being actively maintained and set up is relatively complex.


this? https://github.com/QED-it/zkinterface

Yes, included the reference in the new commit

dcmiddle · 2022-01-05T21:57:13Z

General items:

Please provide references / links for external algorithms, components etc.
This reads like you may have an implementation already, if so please link.
Also please line wrap at 100 characters. This makes subsequent diffs easier.

Signed-off-by: Aveadip Mandal <[email protected]>

dcmiddle · 2022-01-07T20:45:40Z

Thanks for the additional clarifications.
I think the gist is that this RFC is the explanation for hyperledger-archives/ursa#192.
Ursa has been a crypto library with the primary intent of aiding hyperledger projects and a secondary priority of being an asset to the broader open source community.
How does adding a command line utility fit into the existing structure?
Is there a way to provide this functionality as a library API?
In either case how will this be of use to the hyperledger or general communities? For example, imagine you a writing a smart contract for Besu. How would you make use of the proposed features?
Can you provide normative references for the major pieces, especially R1CS?
Thanks!

brentzundel · 2022-01-19T15:20:54Z

I'm glad to see the additions that have been made.
I would also like to see the answers to Dan's questions (e.g., I don't see a normative reference for R1CS yet)

hartm · 2022-02-02T15:29:17Z

Things that need to be done:

Provide R1CS definition.
More references for the main bits. Brent has agreed to help suggest things for which we need references.

brentzundel

@hartm I have more thoroughly reviewed

brentzundel · 2022-02-02T16:53:37Z

0000-zk-framework.md

+
+# Summary
+[summary]: #summary
+Generic zero knowledge libraries such as bellman, bulletproof, etc come with two components


would like to see references to bellman and bulletproof libraries

brentzundel · 2022-02-02T16:56:46Z

0000-zk-framework.md

+frontends and backends. Application programmers write their business logic using the frontend. The
+backend handles the underlying cryptography. Traditional zero knowledge libraries do not allow mix
+and match between different backends and frontends. In this zero knowledge framework one can use
+rust r1cs library as front end and either bellman or bulletproof as backend. In future versions we


'a' rust R1CS library or 'the' R1CS library? In other words, does this sentence talk about how this zero knowledge framework is a rust library for R1CS, or how this zero knowledge framework uses an R1CS library?
If it is the former, that should be clarified, if it is the latter, there should be a reference to the R1CS library.

brentzundel · 2022-02-02T16:57:28Z

0000-zk-framework.md

+on deployment options which might not be obvious to the application developer. Moreover, application
+developers can have different preferences for different frontends. To make life easy for application
+developers, ideally we should have seemless compatibility between different frontend and backends. In
+the first version of this framework we support rust r1cs as front end, bellman and bullet proof as


another place for links

brentzundel · 2022-02-02T16:57:44Z

0000-zk-framework.md

+# Guide-level explanation
+[guide-level-explanation]: #guide-level-explanation
+
+This project demonstrates R1CS logic with backends to Bellman and Bulletproofs.


another place for links

brentzundel · 2022-02-02T17:00:13Z

0000-zk-framework.md

+
+main.rs: this file contains sample code on how to use the framework, get_circuit function defines
+the circuit for which zero knowledge proofs will be generated
+r1csbellman.rs, r1csbulletproof.rs: modules that convert r1cs spec to underlying backends


Above it talked about an R1CS library. This talks about an R1CS spec. In my mind those are two very different things. I don't see references here to either.

brentzundel · 2022-02-02T17:08:55Z

0000-zk-framework.md

+# Drawbacks
+[drawbacks]: #drawbacks
+
+We have chosen r1cs rust library (https://github.com/mir-protocol/r1cs) as frontend, which might


here we have a link to the R1CS library!
I suppose this probably answers a question I had earlier about 'a' library vs 'the' library.

I recommend creating a # References section and putting all of the references in there, then linking to that section everywhere you need to in the text.

brentzundel · 2022-02-02T17:11:45Z

0000-zk-framework.md

+- Why is this design the best in the space of possible designs?
+- What other designs have been considered and what is the rationale for not
+  choosing them?
+- What is the impact of not doing this?
+- For incorporating new protocol implementations what other implementations
+  exist and why were they not selected?
+- For new protocols, what related protocols exist and why do the not satisfy
+  requirements?


these are questions that should be answered in the alternatives section. The snippet below is okay, but doesn't go into the detail that answering these questions would.

While I would prefer to have actual answers to these questions, if the text below is intended to be sufficient, then the questions themselves should be removed.

brentzundel · 2022-02-02T17:13:40Z

0000-zk-framework.md

+- What parts of the design do you expect to resolve through the RFC process
+  before this gets merged?
+- What parts of the design do you expect to resolve through the implementation
+  of this feature before stabilization?
+- What related issues do you consider out of scope for this RFC that could be
+  addressed in the future independently of the solution that comes out of this
+  RFC?


same comments here as in the alternatives section. The text is okay, but doesn't directly answer the questions.
It is also a good place to talk about all the things this RFC doesn't do (and why).

avradip requested review from brentzundel, danintel, dcmiddle, dhuseby, dubovitskaya, hartm, mac-arrap, manudrijvers, mikelodder7 and vaporos as code owners January 5, 2022 06:48

zk framework ppt

01378b4

Signed-off-by: Avradip Mandal <[email protected]>

avradip force-pushed the main branch from ebab9e1 to 01378b4 Compare January 5, 2022 20:09

brentzundel reviewed Jan 5, 2022

View reviewed changes

dcmiddle reviewed Jan 5, 2022

View reviewed changes

Addressing various comments

5a904ff

Signed-off-by: Aveadip Mandal <[email protected]>

brentzundel reviewed Feb 2, 2022

View reviewed changes


		We have chosen r1cs-select as frontend, which might not be preferred frontend for all users.

		# Rationale and alternatives


		zk-interface is the defacto prior art. It has extensive features. However, it is not being actively maintained and set up is relatively complex.

		# Unresolved questions

zk framework ppt #28

Are you sure you want to change the base?

zk framework ppt #28

Conversation

avradip commented Jan 5, 2022

Uh oh!

brentzundel commented Jan 5, 2022

Uh oh!

avradip commented Jan 5, 2022 via email

Uh oh!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

dcmiddle commented Jan 5, 2022

Uh oh!

dcmiddle commented Jan 7, 2022

Uh oh!

brentzundel commented Jan 19, 2022

Uh oh!

hartm commented Feb 2, 2022

Uh oh!

brentzundel left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Reviewers

Assignees

Labels

Milestone

Development

Uh oh!

4 participants