This article discusses the common misconceptions about SNARKs (Succinct Non-interactive ARgument of Knowledge), a cryptographic tool vital in decentralized systems. The author emphasizes the importance of SNARKs in processing data by potentially adversarial entities, proving the data’s validity and correct processing without revealing the actual data. The article also highlights the confusion around the terminology and the misconceptions by designers and users of SNARKs. The author provides recommendations to improve the understanding and application of SNARKs.
- Clarify Terminology: The article suggests that the term “transparent SNARK” should be used to refer to any transparent SNARK, and if an interactive analog is ever deployed, it should be called a transparent interactive argument.
- Understand Backend Compatibility: The author recommends encouraging a deeper understanding of the back-ends originally described as targeting R1CS, which have been maligned as incapable of interfacing with certain front-end techniques.
- Consider Application Dependency: The choice to use a small field is highly application-dependent, and this nuance is often missed in public discussions.
- Improve SNARK Performance: The article suggests that efforts should be made to modify existing back-ends to interface with new front-end techniques and other optimizations to improve SNARK performance.