Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

[Question] Support for disjunctive proofs #360

Open
based-a-tron opened this issue Dec 11, 2022 · 1 comment
Open

[Question] Support for disjunctive proofs #360

based-a-tron opened this issue Dec 11, 2022 · 1 comment

Comments

@based-a-tron
Copy link

Is there any support planned (or already available) for disjunctive proofs, or, alternatively, generating a "fake" RangeProof and/or InnerProductProof given the challenge scalars in advance, in support of CDS94 style disjunctive proofs? It's entirely possible that this machinery is already available, in which case I haven't discovered it yet, and I suppose it would be nice to add some more documentation for it.

Please forgive my ignorance if this question is better suited for the Merlin repository, or if I've made some other error in judgement; I'm not a cryptographer.

@based-a-tron
Copy link
Author

Assuming that this is not planned, and I have the desire to implement this myself, is it sufficient to simulate the proof with a fixed RNG, and then just calculate any one of the commitments to be the additive inverse of all the others?
For instance, can I just calculate x, y, z, c, U, and S randomly, and then just calculate the bit commitment A as the additive inverse of the remaining summands? Or does this leak information that this is a false proof, somehow, and I have to forge the commitments more carefully? Again, not a cryptographer, so I want to be really careful before doing anything.

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
Development

No branches or pull requests

1 participant