giantahead

Having seen the experiment in it's beginning (hola E and team), I wonder: out of things you didn't use, have you found the changes to be 'for better good' as well?

one can never bring this up enough when discussing execution trust, but still, in context of relative security, some things look weaker than others

This is awesome! Much interested to read audit results.

Amazing idea! And brilliant whitepaper, which reads even better than code, by the way.

Even being a happy Themis user myself, I wonder how irregular style in some languages (like Python) is.

Techniques for noticing you're almost shooting yourself in the leg, then suddenly saving the situation very last moment, mi amigo :)

Very good idea! Will try it over the weekend, hope the implementation is sound, too.

Cons are: - Security - Disk I/O, if things get intense.

Yes, exactly, lots of round trips, quite expensive to calculate each. SMP, the ZKP protocol they're using, is quite expensive itself, but promises even better security and nifty set of additional features, based info from presentation linked in the article.

However, I think that ZKP is not what you want for regular authentication: just for specific cases, where ZKP properties shine the most.

Your case is a case of established trust relationship (remote party has your private key it trusts), which is somewhat different from what folks in the article suggest, hence the zero knowledge part. so, for them ZK property matters a lot, to my understanding.