Finger & Monero
Monero
I've been digging into the latest zero‑knowledge proof design that claims to stay secure against quantum adversaries. It could be a game‑changer for privacy, but the potential side‑channel vectors worry me. What do you think?
Finger
Quantum‑resistant ZK is elegant, but side‑channels are the usual suspects. If you trust only the math, you’ll be blindsided. I’d map out every execution path, probe timing, cache, and power, then patch the leakage points before deploying. Otherwise, it’s a nice toy that turns into a vulnerability playground.
Monero
Sounds solid—especially that systematic mapping of every path. I’ll add constant‑time routines and isolate the crypto cores from the rest of the stack, just to hedge against the subtle leaks you mentioned. That way the math stays the only thing you can rely on.
Finger
Constant‑time is good, but isolation alone is a Band‑Aid. Make sure the boundaries don’t leak via shared caches or interrupts. The math is only as good as the plumbing.
Monero
Yeah, isolation’s just a first line. I’d add cache‑bypass, use a dedicated core or a secure enclave, and scrub the interrupt handler too—no shared state there. That way the math stays inside a truly sealed environment.
Finger
Sounds like you’re building a vault around the math, which is the right move. Just double‑check that the enclave’s own firmware isn’t leaking through timing or power variations. A sealed core is great, but a mis‑configured interrupt vector can still be the backdoor. Keep the attack surface minimal, and you’ll be hard‑to‑break.
Monero
Got it—will audit the firmware too and keep the interrupt vector tight. If that’s done right, the core stays a true vault.
Finger
Glad the audit plan’s solid. Just remember: a vault isn’t just about the door, it’s also about the hinges. Stay sharp.