惯性聚合 高效追踪和阅读你感兴趣的博客、新闻、科技资讯
阅读原文 在惯性聚合中打开

推荐订阅源

G
Google Developers Blog
人人都是产品经理
人人都是产品经理
爱范儿
爱范儿
云风的 BLOG
云风的 BLOG
Last Week in AI
Last Week in AI
H
Hackread – Cybersecurity News, Data Breaches, AI and More
B
Blog
让小产品的独立变现更简单 - ezindie.com
让小产品的独立变现更简单 - ezindie.com
H
Help Net Security
B
Blog RSS Feed
奇客Solidot–传递最新科技情报
奇客Solidot–传递最新科技情报
N
Netflix TechBlog - Medium
S
SegmentFault 最新的问题
The Cloudflare Blog
I
InfoQ
美团技术团队
博客园 - 三生石上(FineUI控件)
MyScale Blog
MyScale Blog
酷 壳 – CoolShell
酷 壳 – CoolShell
博客园 - 司徒正美
L
LangChain Blog
A
About on SuperTechFans
T
The Blog of Author Tim Ferriss
Y
Y Combinator Blog

cs.CR updates on arXiv.org

Agentic Vulnerability Reasoning on Windows COM Binaries From Beats to Breaches:How Offensive AI Infers Sensitive User Information from Playlists Undetectable Backdoors in Model Parameters: Hiding Sparse Secrets in High Dimensions When Embedding-Based Defenses Fail: Rethinking Safety in LLM-Based Multi-Agent Systems Token-Efficient Change Detection in LLM APIs Selfie-Capture Dynamics as an Auxiliary Signal Against Deepfakes and Injection Attacks for Mobile Identity Verification Trident: Improving Malware Detection with LLMs and Behavioral Features When Alignment Isn't Enough: Response-Path Attacks on LLM Agents RefusalGuard: Geometry-Preserving Fine-Tuning for Safety in LLMs Checkerboard: A Simple, Effective, Efficient and Learning-free Clean Label Backdoor Attack with Low Poisoning Budget Block-wise Codeword Embedding for Reliable Multi-bit Text Watermarking Secret Stealing Attacks on Local LLM Fine-Tuning through Supply-Chain Model Code Backdoors Enhancing Linux Privilege Escalation Attack Capabilities of Local LLM Agents Defusing the Trigger: Plug-and-Play Defense for Backdoored LLMs via Tail-Risk Intrinsic Geometric Smoothing Evaluating Jailbreaking Vulnerabilities in LLMs Deployed as Assistants for Smart Grid Operations: A Benchmark Against NERC Standards Behavioral Canaries: Auditing Private Retrieved Context Usage in RL Fine-Tuning FlexServe: A Fast and Secure LLM Serving System for Mobile Devices with Flexible Resource Isolation Breaking MCP with Function Hijacking Attacks: Novel Threats for Function Calling and Agentic Models Text Steganography with Dynamic Codebook and Multimodal Large Language Model An AI Agent Execution Environment to Safeguard User Data TwoHamsters: Benchmarking Multi-Concept Compositional Unsafety in Text-to-Image Models Fundamental Limitations of Favorable Privacy-Utility Guarantees for DP-SGD Symbolic Guardrails for Domain-Specific Agents: Stronger Safety and Security Guarantees Without Sacrificing Utility Hardening x402: PII-Safe Agentic Payments via Pre-Execution Metadata Filtering QShield: Securing Neural Networks Against Adversarial Attacks using Quantum Circuits Hijacking Text Heritage: Hiding the Human Signature through Homoglyphic Substitution Like a Hammer, It Can Build, It Can Break: Large Language Model Uses, Perceptions, and Adoption in Cybersecurity Operations on Reddit Private Seeds, Public LLMs: Realistic and Privacy-Preserving Synthetic Data Generation One Word at a Time: Incremental Completion Decomposition Breaks LLM Safety Measuring and Exploiting Contextual Bias in LLM-Assisted Security Code Review
Single-Query Verifiable Proof-of-Sequential-Work
Souvik Sur · 2022-02-21 · via cs.CR updates on arXiv.org

We propose a proof-of-sequential-work (PoSW) that can be verified with only a single query to the random oracle for each random challenge. Proofs-of-sequential-work are protocols that facilitate a verifier to efficiently verify if a prover has executed a specified number of computations sequentially. Denoting this number of sequential computations with N , the prover with poly(N) parallelism must take $Ω(N)$-sequential time while the verifier verifies the computation in O(log N)-sequential time using upto O(log N) parallelism. We propose a PoSW that allows any verifier, even the one with no parallelism, to verify using just a single sequential computation on a single challenge. All the existing PoSWs [10, 5, 2, 6] mandate a prover to compute a sequence of responses from a random oracle against N-rounds of queries. Then the prover commits this sequence using a commitment scheme (e.g., Merkle root (like) commitment) predefined in the PoSWs. Now the verifier asks the prover to provide a set of proofs against t randomly chosen checkpoints, called challenges, in the computed sequence. The verifier finds out the commitment from each of these proofs spending O(log N) rounds of queries to the oracle. It can be reduced to a single round of queries only if the verifier owns O(log N) parallelism [6]. The verifier in our PoSW demands no parallelism but uses a single query to the random oracle in order to verify each of the t challenges. The key observation is that the commitment schemes themselves in the prior works demand O(log N ) oracle queries to verify.