From: khijol!erc@apple.com (Ed Carp)
Date: Sat, 18 Sep 93 21:20:38 PDT
To: tcmay@netcom.com (Timothy C. May)
Subject: Re: Definition of "Zero Knowledge"
In-Reply-To: <9309190335.AA22435@netcom5.netcom.com>
Message-ID: <m0oeGCo-00021LC@khijol>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text


> > > Not necessarily. Zero knowledge proof techniques, for instance, can be
> > > applied to make source code as impenetrable as one wishes. This tends to
> > > carry a heavy runtime overhead, of course.
> > 
> > Could you go into more detail on this?  Thanks!
> > -- 
> > Ed Carp, N7EKG			erc@apple.com			510/659-9560
> 
> I didn't write the item above, but I'll add my comments anyway.
> 
> Zero knowledge interactive proof systems are a critical part of modern
> crypto. Here's the brief summary from the Cypherpunks Glossary,
> available by anon. ftp at soda.berkeley.edu in pub/cypherpunks/misc as
> glossary.text.gz.

Thanks for the definition (but I knew that, anyway).  Sorru I wasn't clear -
what I was looking for was examples of how zero-knowledge proof techniques
could make source code impenetrable.

Source would be nice, too... ;)
-- 
Ed Carp, N7EKG			erc@apple.com			510/659-9560
                            anon-0001@khijol.uucp
If you want magic, let go of your armor.  Magic is so much stronger than
steel!        -- Richard Bach, "The Bridge Across Forever"