Is Diffie Hellman not an application of ZKP?

Sarath Amay Nair

11/21/23, 9:14 AM

From what I could gather, zero knowledge proof is a way for a prover to convince a verifer of possession of some data without sharing said data. I understood the ali baba cave problem. Diffie Hellman on the other hand seems to be a way for two people to create a shared secret key without explicitly divulging the key itself.

The difference is clear till this point. However, a lot of projects and research papers on ZKP are about sharing the secret, such as email-password authentication with ZKP. In such examples the line between Diffie Hellman and ZKP is blurring since both appear to do the same thing.

Are they the same or not? I'd also appreciate some alternative definitions and explanations of ZKP.

100

1 + 0

zero-knowledge-proofs

diffie-hellman

Score:1

Crypto

Pegasus

12/8/23, 1:58 PM

No they are not the same. Zero-knowledge proofs allow a prover to convince a verifier that they know a certain piece of data without revealing the actual data, while Diffie Hellman key exchange allows two parties to generate a shared secret key without revealing the key to any third party. A Zero-knowledge proof is based on the concept of proving knowledge of Z without revealing the actual Z, instead on Diffie Hellman key exchange is based on the concept of generating a shared secret key without revealing the key itself.

+ 0

Elon Musk

I sit in a Tesla and translated this thread with Ai:

EN: Is Diffie Hellman not an application of ZKP?

Post an answer

Most people don’t grasp that asking a lot of questions unlocks learning and improves interpersonal bonding. In Alison’s studies, for example, though people could accurately recall how many questions had been asked in their conversations, they didn’t intuit the link between questions and liking. Across four studies, in which participants were engaged in conversations themselves or read transcripts of others’ conversations, people tended not to realize that question asking would influence—or had influenced—the level of amity between the conversationalists.