Hacker Newsnew | past | comments | ask | show | jobs | submitlogin

Hashing is wasteful, but its redeeming quality is that it takes negligible work to validate, despite taking significant work to find values whose hashes have certain characteristics. Just hash the value produced by the worker node and make sure it conforms to the parameters. Should take microseconds.

With proof of useful work, it's probably significantly harder to find similar problem domains where the validation is fast but the useful work is laborious.



Maybe I'm wrong but wasn't a property of NP-hard problems that you can verify them in P time but find a solution only in >P time? (As far as we know)


NP can only verify positive solutions in P time.

Useful cryptographic problems are usually in the intersection of NP and co-NP.

Current best guess is that NP and co-NP are different.

Thus NP complete problems can't be in co-NP, and thus are probably not cryptographically useful. There's a way to make this argument a bit less vague, but it basically explains why cryptographers have stopped looking at NP complete problems.

There was a cryptosystem based on solving knapsack problems. But they had to patch problems until people stopped paying attention.


Well,

Think of the traveling salesman problem for example.

The only way to verify someone's answer is to do all of it yourself too.


You can do it by checking that the solution provided is a valid traversal of the graph, and does not touch two vertices twice. If there are N vertices, you can check in O(N) time.


It's about validating the proposed solution on being the fastest path, not if the proposed solution is a valid path.




Consider applying for YC's Fall 2026 batch! Applications are open till July 27.

Guidelines | FAQ | Lists | API | Security | Legal | Apply to YC | Contact

Search: