implementing-zero-knowledge-proof-for-authentication
Implements the Schnorr identification protocol and a simplified Zero-Knowledge Password Proof (ZKPP) over the discrete logarithm problem, letting a prover authenticate by demonstrating knowledge of a secret without ever revealing it to the server. Use when designing or building password-less or password-secret-free authentication, or when a server must verify a user's credential without learning or storing the underlying secret.
- License 许可
- Apache-2.0
- 最近更新
- 2026-08-31
- Stars
- ★ 3.6w
- Forks
- 4.4k
01 前言 Front Matter
- name
- implementing-zero-knowledge-proof-for-authentication
- tags
- [ "cryptography", "zero-knowledge-proof", "authentication", "privacy", "zkp" ]
- author
- mahipal
- domain
- cybersecurity
- license
- Apache-2.0
- version
- 1.0
- nist_csf
- [ "PR.DS-01", "PR.DS-02", "PR.DS-10" ]
- subdomain
- cryptography
- description
- Implements the Schnorr identification protocol and a simplified Zero-Knowledge Password Proof (ZKPP) over the discrete logarithm problem, letting a prover authenticate by demonstrating knowledge of a secret without ever revealing it to the server. Use when designing or building password-less or password-secret-free authentication, or when a server must verify a user's credential without learning or storing the underlying secret.
- mitre_attack
- [ "T1600", "T1573", "T1553" ]
02 资源文件 5
- 许可证LICENSE11.0 KB
- 参考文档references/api-reference.md1.6 KB
- 参考文档references/standards.md1.0 KB
- 参考文档references/workflows.md1.3 KB
- 脚本scripts/agent.py5.4 KB
03 SKILL.md 正文
Implementing Zero-Knowledge Proof for Authentication
Overview
Zero-Knowledge Proofs (ZKPs) allow a prover to demonstrate knowledge of a secret (such as a password or private key) without revealing the secret itself. This skill implements the Schnorr identification protocol and a simplified ZKPP (Zero-Knowledge Password Proof) using the discrete logarithm problem, enabling authentication where the server never learns the user's password.
When to Use
- When deploying or configuring implementing zero knowledge proof for authentication capabilities in your environment
- When establishing security controls aligned to compliance requirements
- When building or improving security architecture for this domain
- When conducting security assessments that require this implementation
Prerequisites
- Familiarity with cryptography concepts and tools
- Access to a test or lab environment for safe execution
- Python 3.8+ with required dependencies installed
- Appropriate authorization for any testing activities
Objectives
- Implement Schnorr's identification protocol for ZKP authentication
- Build a non-interactive ZKP using Fiat-Shamir heuristic
- Implement zero-knowledge password proof (ZKPP)
- Demonstrate completeness, soundness, and zero-knowledge properties
- Compare ZKP authentication with traditional password verification
Key Concepts
ZKP Properties
| Property | Description |
|---|---|
| Completeness | Honest prover always convinces honest verifier |
| Soundness | Dishonest prover cannot convince verifier (except negligible probability) |
| Zero-Knowledge | Verifier learns nothing beyond the statement's truth |
Schnorr Protocol
- Setup: Public generator g, prime p, q (order of g)
- Registration: Prover computes y = g^x mod p (public key from secret x)
- Commitment: Prover sends t = g^r mod p (random r)
- Challenge: Verifier sends random c
- Response: Prover sends s = r + c*x mod q
- Verify: Check g^s == t * y^c mod p
Security Considerations
- Use cryptographically secure random number generators
- Challenge must be unpredictable (from verifier's perspective)
- For non-interactive proofs, use Fiat-Shamir with collision-resistant hash
- ZKP alone does not provide forward secrecy; combine with TLS
Validation Criteria
- [ ] Honest prover always verifies successfully (completeness)
- [ ] Random response without secret does not verify (soundness)
- [ ] Server never receives the secret value
- [ ] Non-interactive proof is verifiable offline
- [ ] Multiple authentications produce different transcripts
- [ ] Protocol resists replay attacks
04 同仓库更多 Skills
verifying-build-provenance-with-slsa-sigstore
Verifies artifact signatures and SLSA provenance using Sigstore's cosign (verify, verify-attestation, verify-blob-attestation) and slsa-verifier (verify-artifact), enforcing keyless OIDC builder identity and source repo against SLSA Build levels. Use in CI/CD before deploying artifacts, when consuming third-party attestations, establishing a SLSA Build L3 pipeline, or confirming provenance during incident response or admission control.
validating-tpm-measured-boot-attestation
Verifies TPM 2.0 measured-boot integrity and remote attestation with tpm2-tools -- reading PCRs (tpm2_pcrread), replaying the boot event log, generating and checking signed quotes (tpm2_quote/tpm2_checkquote), and sealing secrets to a PCR policy. Use to confirm a system booted trusted firmware/kernel for Zero Trust device posture, detect boot-chain tampering via PCR drift, or build a golden-value baseline for fleet attestation.
validating-backup-integrity-for-recovery
Validates backup integrity through cryptographic hash verification, automated restore testing, corruption detection, and recoverability checks to confirm backups are reliable for disaster recovery and ransomware response. Use before relying on backups for recovery, when building post-backup validation pipelines, auditing backup infrastructure for compliance, or checking immutable/air-gapped backups for silent corruption or tampering.
triaging-windows-with-kape
Runs KAPE (Kroll Artifact Parser and Extractor) to collect targeted forensic artifacts (registry hives, $MFT, event logs, prefetch, browser data) via Targets and parse them with Modules wrapping Eric Zimmerman's EZ Tools (PECmd, MFTECmd, RECmd). Use during early incident containment/triage when full disk imaging is impractical but a defensible, parseable Windows artifact set is needed quickly, including at-scale remote collection.
triaging-vulnerabilities-with-ssvc-framework
Triages and prioritizes vulnerabilities with CISA's Stakeholder-Specific Vulnerability Categorization (SSVC) decision tree, weighing exploitation status (via the CISA KEV catalog and FIRST EPSS API), technical impact, automatability, and mission prevalence to output Track/Track*/Attend/Act decisions. Use when prioritizing vulnerability scan results (OpenVAS, Nessus, Qualys) for remediation planning beyond raw CVSS scores.
triaging-security-incident
Performs initial triage of security incidents using the NIST SP 800-61r3 and SANS PICERL frameworks, classifying incident type, assigning priority by business impact, and routing to the appropriate response team. Use when a SIEM/EDR alert needs human classification, concurrent alerts must be prioritized, or a user report or threat-intel IOC match requires initial incident categorization.