The DOI matches its Crossref record; 67 of the 72 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
Pinocchio: Nearly Practical Verifiable Computation
Open accessAbstract
To instill greater confidence in computations outsourced to the cloud, clients should be able to verify the correctness of the results returned. To this end, we introduce Pinocchio, a built system for efficiently verifying general computations while relying only on cryptographic assumptions. With Pinocchio, the client creates a public evaluation key to describe her computation; this setup is proportional to evaluating the computation once. The worker then evaluates the computation on a particular input and uses the evaluation key to produce a proof of correctness. The proof is only 288 bytes, regardless of the computation performed or the size of the inputs and outputs. Anyone can use a public verification key to check the proof. Crucially, our evaluation on seven applications demonstrates that Pinocchio is efficient in practice too. Pinocchio's verification time is typically 10ms: 5-7 orders of magnitude less than previous work; indeed Pinocchio is the first general-purpose system to demonstrate verification cheaper than native execution (for some apps). Pinocchio also reduces the worker's proof effort by an additional 19-60x. As an additional feature, Pinocchio generalizes to zero-knowledge proofs at a negligible cost over the base protocol. Finally, to aid development, Pinocchio provides an end-to-end toolchain that compiles a subset of C into programs that implement the verifiable computation protocol.
Overview
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
Claims the paper makes
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Claims other papers make about this one
Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?
The cited source says what the claim attributes to it.
In the citing paper
“In this direction, [118] proposed a multi-party protocol for constructing the public parameters of the Pinocchio zk-SNARK [95], which is the baseline for Zcash [17].”
From Privacy-Preserving Solutions for Blockchain: Review and Challenges (2019) · cites this paper as [95]
The cited source says what the claim attributes to it.
In the citing paper
“Pinocchio by Parno et al. in 2013 which applies ZKP to reallife use cases [128]”
From A Survey of Self-Sovereign Identity Ecosystem (2021) · cites this paper as [128]
In the citing paper
“Man-in-the-Middle attacks [84], [85] intercept the models exchanged between the clients and the server and replace them with malicious model updates.”
From Vulnerabilities in federated learning (2021) · cites this paper as [85]
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
The self-check needs the paper’s full text.
Citations
Cites
Adomavičius, G., & Tuzhilin, A. (2005) · IEEE Transactions on Knowledge and Data Engineering · doi:10.1109/tkde.2005.99 · Cited by 10,539
The Design and Analysis of Computer Algorithms
Aho, A. V., & Hopcroft, J. E. (1974) · CERN Document Server (European Organization for Nuclear Research) · Cited by 9,403
Motwani, R., & Raghavan, P. (1995) · Cambridge University Press eBooks · doi:10.1017/cbo9780511814075 · Cited by 5,098
Identity-Based Encryption from the Weil Pairing
Boneh, D., & Franklin, M. (2003) · SIAM Journal on Computing · doi:10.1137/s0097539701398521 · Cited by 3,540
The knowledge complexity of interactive proof systems
Goldwasser, S., Micali, S., & Rackoff, C. (1989) · SIAM Journal on Computing · doi:10.1137/0218012 · Cited by 3,285
Practical byzantine fault tolerance and proactive recovery
Castro, M., & Liskov, B. (2002) · ACM Transactions on Computer Systems · doi:10.1145/571637.571640 · Cited by 2,475
A fully homomorphic encryption scheme
Boneh, D., & Gentry, C. (2009) · Cited by 2,341
Self-citationLattice Gas Cellular Automata and Lattice Boltzmann Models
Wolf-Gladrow, D. A. (2000) · Lecture notes in mathematics · doi:10.1007/b72010 · Cited by 1,623
Proof verification and the hardness of approximation problems
Arora, S., Lund, C., Motwani, R., Sudan, M., & Szegedy, M. (1998) · Journal of the ACM · doi:10.1145/278298.278306 · Cited by 1,449
Short Signatures Without Random Oracles
Boneh, D., & Boyen, X. (2004) · Lecture notes in computer science · doi:10.1007/978-3-540-24676-3_4 · Cited by 1,448
Cited by
Sorted by citations
Zerocash: Decentralized Anonymous Payments from Bitcoin
Ben‐Sasson, E., Chiesa, A., Garman, C., Green, M., Miers, I., Tromer, E., & Virza, M. (2014) · IEEE Symposium on Security and Privacy (S&P) · doi:10.1109/sp.2014.36 · Cited by 1,987
Hawk: The Blockchain Model of Cryptography and Privacy-Preserving Smart Contracts
Kosba, A., Miller, A., Shi, E., Wen, Z., & Papamanthou, C. (2016) · 2016 IEEE Symposium on Security and Privacy (SP) · doi:10.1109/sp.2016.55 · Cited by 2,227
A Survey on the Edge Computing for the Internet of Things
Yu, W., Liang, F., He, X., Hatcher, W. G., Lu, C., Lin, J., & Yang, X. (2018) · IEEE Access · doi:10.1109/access.2017.2778504 · Cited by 1,520
On the Size of Pairing-Based Non-interactive Arguments
Groth, J. (2016) · Lecture Notes in Computer Science · doi:10.1007/978-3-662-49896-5_11 · Cited by 1,271
On Scaling Decentralized Blockchains
Croman, K., Decker, C., Eyal, I., Gencer, A. E., Juels, A., Kosba, A. E., Miller, A. E., Saxena, P., Shi, E., Sirer, E. G., et al. (2016) · Lecture notes in computer science · doi:10.1007/978-3-662-53357-4_8 · Cited by 1,199
Metadata
- Authors
- Parno, B., Howell, J., Gentry, C., & Raykova, M.
- Affiliations
- Microsoft (United States) (US)
- IBM (United States) (US)
- Venue
- 2013 IEEE Symposium on Security and Privacy
- Publisher
- IEEE
- Published
- 2013-05
- Pages
- 238-252
- ISSN
- 1081-6011 (ISSN-L)
- OpenAlex
- W2018746447
- Cited by
- 864
- References
- 72
- Citations by year
- 2026: 40 · 2025: 44 · 2024: 68 · 2023: 70 · 2022: 101 · 2021: 95 · 2020: 82 · 2019: 68 · 2018: 54 · 2017: 52 · 2016: 55 · 2015: 51 · 2014: 54 · 2013: 25
- FWCI
- 39.83
- Type
- conference paper
- Language
- en
- Open access
- bronze
- doi.org
- Locations
- IEEE Symposium on Security and Privacy (S&P) (publishedVersion)
- Funders
- National Science Foundation (1017660)
- Topics
- Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Computer Networks and Communications › Cryptography and Data Security
- Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Information Systems › Cloud Data Security Solutions
- Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Hardware and Architecture › Security and Verification in Computing
- Keywords
- verifiable computation, outsourced computation, cloud computing, correctness proofs, cryptographic assumptions, verification efficiency, zero-knowledge proofs, Pinocchio
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review
