Content
@
0 reply
0 recast
0 reaction
EmpiricalLagrange
@eulerlagrange.eth
Had someone on twitter think they know more than me about zkTLS. Test your understanding and see if you can spot why this person is wrong without opening the thread. cc @avichalp https://x.com/lithdew/status/1875026558899089900?s=46
5 replies
4 recasts
28 reactions
Louis ๐ต ๐ฆ๐
@superlouis.eth
TIL about TLS deniability
1 reply
0 recast
2 reactions
shazow
@shazow.eth
I think that's the main misunderstanding for most people (was mine for longer than I care to admit!)
1 reply
0 recast
1 reaction
EmpiricalLagrange
@eulerlagrange.eth
Was for me too man, thereโs no shame. Iโve been in crypto since i was 16. We deal with asymmetric crypto which makes life easier. I think I skipped symmetric crypto altogether and just assumed everyone is smart enough to use asymmetric. Life lesson: donโt skip fundamentals
1 reply
0 recast
1 reaction
shazow
@shazow.eth
I was familiar with both, I just made an incorrect assumption that I held for a long time. It actually wasn't until I dug deep into zktls that I realized my assumption about how TLS worked as wrong! Even having written a very popular http library, I just never had to touch TLS at a low level enough for it to matter.
1 reply
0 recast
1 reaction
Louis ๐ต ๐ฆ๐
@superlouis.eth
Does that mean that it's not possible without your MPC solution (with the current state on ZK research) to first prove that the initial handshake and key exchange is valid, and then prove the symmetric exchange, without revealing any secret?
0 reply
0 recast
1 reaction