
Understanding zero-knowledge proofs through illustrated examples - based2
https://blog.goodaudience.com/understanding-zero-knowledge-proofs-through-simple-examples-df673f796d99
======
betterunix2
This is good, but zero-knowledge is actually a stronger property than just
hiding the "knowledge" needed to complete the proof. A zero-knowledge proof
should not reveal _any_ knowledge to the verifier, in the sense that the
verifier should not be able to compute _anything_ after the proof that it
could not have computed beforehand. So among other things, Bob will not only
be unable to prove knowledge of where Waldo is, but also not be able to prove
that Alice has that knowledge.

Obviously that is not true of non-interactive zero-knowledge, which is why
NIZK should not be confused with "actual" zero knowledge.

------
haolez
> Or, he can do a thorough cavity search on Alice before Alice enters a secret
> room to cut the page.

This was slightly distracting :)

~~~
ragebol
Who would not be distracted by that happening?

