Zero-Knowledge Proofs: A Complete Overview from Privacy Protection to Blockchain Scalability

Why Do You Need to Understand Zero-Knowledge Proofs?

In the Web3 era, a core contradiction has been troubling everyone: how to build trust while protecting privacy?

In traditional internet, every time you log into a website, the system needs to verify your identity — but this means you must submit real information. Banks require your ID number, exchanges need your KYC info, social platforms want your location data. These data are stored centrally on a company’s servers, and if a data breach occurs, personal privacy is completely compromised.

Blockchain promises decentralization and transparency, but transactions on public chains are fully open — every transfer is recorded, tracked, and linked. Such “openness” is actually a privacy crisis.

Zero-knowledge proof technology was born precisely to solve this paradox. It allows you to prove to others that “I have something” or “I know an answer” without revealing any specific information.

This is not a sci-fi concept — as early as 1985, MIT cryptographers Shafi Goldwasser and Silvio Micali described this idea in a paper.

What Exactly Is Zero-Knowledge Proof?

Simply put, a Zero-Knowledge Proof(Zero-Knowledge Proof) refers to a method where one party (the prover) can convince another party (the verifier) that a statement is true, without revealing any related specific information.

A real-life example: Suppose you want to prove you’re a good cook but don’t want your friends to see your “battlefield” in the kitchen. You can go into the kitchen alone, close the door, and two hours later serve a carefully prepared feast. After tasting, friends can be convinced you can cook — they see the result, not the process, and they don’t know what ingredients or seasonings you used. This is the core logic of zero-knowledge proofs.

In more technical language: Zero-knowledge proof is a cryptographic protocol that allows one party to prove the truth of a statement to another without revealing any underlying data. It uses complex mathematical operations and encryption mechanisms to ensure the verifier can verify the truthfulness of the information but cannot reverse-engineer the original data.

The Three Core Properties of Zero-Knowledge Proofs

Any effective zero-knowledge proof system must satisfy three conditions:

Completeness: If the statement is true, an honest prover can convince an honest verifier. In other words, truthful statements can always be verified.

Soundness: If the statement is false, an dishonest prover is almost impossible to fool an honest verifier. Cheaters will be caught during verification.

Zero-Knowledge: The verifier learns nothing beyond the fact that the statement is true. They cannot extract any additional information from the interaction.

Interactive vs Non-Interactive: Two Types of Proofs

Based on the interaction mode between the two parties during the proof process, zero-knowledge proofs are divided into two main categories.

Interactive Zero-Knowledge Proofs

In this mode, the prover and verifier engage in multiple rounds of interaction. The verifier issues random challenges, and the prover responds accordingly until the verifier is convinced.

A classic example is the “Color-Blind Game”: Alice is color-blind, Bob holds two identical balls — one blue, one red. Alice needs to verify whether these balls are truly different in color.

Protocol: Alice hides the balls behind her back, randomly swaps their positions, then asks Bob, “Did I swap them?” If Bob can see the colors, he can answer correctly each time. Initially, Bob has a 50% chance of guessing correctly; after n rounds, the probability of him guessing correctly every time is 1 - (1/2)^n. After enough rounds, Alice can be almost certain Bob is truthful.

Drawbacks of interactive proofs:

• Each verification requires repeating the entire process
• Both parties must be online simultaneously
• Usually trusted for a single verifier; multiple verifiers require multiple rounds

Non-Interactive Zero-Knowledge Proofs

To overcome the limitations of interaction, Manuel Blum, Paul Feldman, and Silvio Micali proposed non-interactive zero-knowledge proofs. In this mode, the prover generates a proof once, and anyone (with the verification algorithm and shared secret) can verify it without further interaction.

A classic analogy is the “Sudoku Game”: Alice solves a Sudoku puzzle and wants to prove to Bob she solved it correctly without revealing the solution. She uses a “tamper-proof machine”:

• Places the original puzzle and solution into the machine
• The machine obfuscates each row, column, and 3x3 box, placing them into 27 bags
• Bob checks these bags; if each contains numbers 1-9 without repeats, it proves Alice’s solution is correct
• Key point: Bob cannot see the actual solution, only the obfuscated verification results

Non-interactive proofs are more efficient but require additional mechanisms (like shared keys or special hardware) to ensure the confidentiality of the verification process.

Four Major Applications of Zero-Knowledge Proofs in Reality

1. Anonymous Payments and Privacy Transactions

Public chain transactions are inherently transparent. Privacy coins like Zcash and Monero use zero-knowledge proofs to hide sender, receiver, amount, and timestamp.

Ethereum’s Tornado Cash takes it further — it is a decentralized mixing service that allows users to perform private transactions on Ethereum. Users deposit funds, then prove via zero-knowledge proofs that they are entitled to withdraw, without linking deposit and withdrawal addresses. This approach preserves blockchain transparency and security while protecting user privacy.

2. Identity Verification and Access Control

Traditional identity verification requires submitting personal info like name, email, date of birth. Zero-knowledge proofs can only verify a specific attribute of identity without revealing full details.

For example, a website only needs to verify “you are an adult” without seeing your ID or exact birth year. You generate a zero-knowledge proof of being over 18 and send it; the site verifies it passes. Similarly, some platforms may need to verify “you are a member of this platform” without revealing your member ID or personal data.

3. Verifiable Computation

When tasks are too complex or costly, users delegate computation to third parties (like Chainlink oracles). But how to ensure the results are correct and not fabricated?

Zero-knowledge proofs allow service providers to submit a “proof of correct computation.” Users can quickly verify this proof, ensuring the result is trustworthy, without redoing the calculation or seeing intermediate steps.

4. Anonymous Voting and Governance

In DAOs or decentralized governance, each token holder has voting rights, but votes should remain confidential. Zero-knowledge proofs can prove “the voter has voting rights” while hiding their identity and vote choice.

Technical Implementations: SNARKs vs STARKs

Currently, the main zero-knowledge proof technologies are two types, each with advantages and disadvantages.

zk-SNARK (Succinct Non-Interactive Argument of Knowledge)

SNARK stands for “zero-knowledge succinct non-interactive argument on knowledge.” It uses elliptic curve cryptography, producing small proof files with fast verification.

Key advantages:

• Low verification cost (gas consumption)
• Small proof size, easy to transmit and store
• Widely adopted in production environments

Major applications: Zcash, Loopring, zkSync 1.0/2.0, Zigzag, Mina, etc.

Limitations:

• Requires a “trusted setup” — initial parameters must be generated honestly; if compromised, system security is at risk
• Vulnerable to quantum attacks (due to elliptic curve cryptography)
• Proof generation requires significant computational power

zk-STARK (Scalable Transparent Argument of Knowledge)

STARK stands for “zero-knowledge scalable transparent argument of knowledge.” Unlike SNARKs, STARKs use collision-resistant hash functions and do not require trusted setup.

Key advantages:

• No trusted setup needed, more transparent and secure
• Faster proof generation, more scalable
• Quantum-resistant (hash functions resist quantum attacks)
• Proof sizes are moderate

Major applications: StarkEx, StarkNet, Immutable X, etc.

Limitations:

• Verification costs are higher (more gas on Ethereum)
• Proof files are larger
• Development is relatively recent; practical experience is still accumulating

How Zero-Knowledge Proofs Enable Blockchain Scalability

In Layer 2 solutions, zk-rollup is a powerful scalability method. Its workflow:

1. Pack hundreds or thousands of user transactions
2. Execute these transactions off-chain
3. Generate a zero-knowledge proof that “all these transactions were executed correctly”
4. Submit the batch of transactions and the proof to Ethereum mainnet
5. Mainnet verifies the proof (only cryptographic verification, no re-execution of all transactions)

Result: transaction throughput increases significantly (over 100x of mainnet), fees drop sharply, and security inherits from the main chain.

Four Major Technical Challenges of Zero-Knowledge Proofs

Hardware Cost

Generating proofs involves intensive mathematical computations — especially multi-scalar multiplication (MSM) and Fast Fourier Transform (FFT). In some systems, 70% of the time is spent on MSM, 30% on FFT.

CPU alone cannot handle this efficiently; hardware acceleration is needed. Industry consensus favors FPGA (Field Programmable Gate Arrays) — they are 3 times cheaper than GPUs and over 10 times more energy-efficient. But FPGA still requires substantial capital investment.

Verification Cost

Verifying a zk-SNARK proof on Ethereum costs about 500,000 gas. zk-STARK verification costs even more. These costs are passed on to users, increasing usage expenses.

Trust Assumptions

zk-SNARK relies on “trusted setup” — initial parameters must be generated honestly; if someone cheats during setup, the entire system is compromised.

zk-STARK does not have this issue but has higher proof and verification costs.

Quantum Threat

zk-SNARKs are based on elliptic curve cryptography, which could be broken by sufficiently powerful quantum computers. zk-STARKs use collision-resistant hash functions, offering better resistance to quantum attacks, which is a key driver for STARK development.

The Future of Zero-Knowledge Proofs

Zero-knowledge proof technology is moving from theory to practice. In Web3 infrastructure, it is becoming a standard tool for privacy protection and scalability.

For developers, zk-tech means leveraging the security of public chains like Ethereum while providing DApps with near Web2 performance and user privacy. This “win-win” scenario is attracting more projects to explore.

However, technical challenges remain — hardware costs, verification expenses, trust models, quantum threats. With advances in hardware acceleration and algorithm optimization, these bottlenecks will gradually be overcome. Zero-knowledge proofs are likely to become the foundational backbone of next-generation blockchains.

Web3 learning in progress, continuously deepening core technology analysis.