* containers: add method to create new {Dict,Set,Array} with custom max_depth
* add vds_tree computation, update tree circuit interface
* add VDTree struct, add DEFAULT_VD_TREE, integrate it with MainPod,EmptyPod,frontend,etc.
* adapt frontend/serialization tests to new containers field (max_depth)
* adapt interfaces to allow using custom vd_tree in frontend & backend constructors
* rename VDTree to VDSet (and derivate namings too)
* containers 'new' always with param 'max_depth', use params.max_depth_mt_containers instead of the global constant MAX_DEPTH
* adapt after rebasing the branch to main latest changes
* apply review suggestions from @ed255
* use emptypod vd_mt_proofs (using vd_set as circuit input), merge the two existing set_targets methods of MainPodVerifyTarget
* document VDSet & vds_root
* migrate from anyhow to thiserror (#190). pending polish error msgs
* Add backtrace and compartmentalize errors
- Include backtraces in the errors we generate. To get this we can't
just return a literal enum, because the backtrace requires a call.
- Related to the previous point: add methods to create errors so
we can include the backtrace conveniently without changing too much
the syntax. So instead of `Err(Error::KeyNotFound(key))` (literal
enum) it will be `Err(Error::key_not_found(key))` (method call)
- Each error should be local to its scope, and each scope should
only return its own error.
- The merkle tree should return `TreeError` and not Error
- The middleware should return `MiddlewareError` and not Error
- With a global Error we can't easily include backend/frontend types in
the error fields, so declare a `BackendError` and a `FrontendError`
and follow the pattern from the previous point
- The Pod traits should be able to return backend errors and will be
used in the frontend; for that we change them to use trait object
Error: `dyn std::error::Error`
* fix error
* apply suggestions from @arnaucube
* rename XError and XResult to Error and Result
* reorg signature
* make frontend custom error more ergonomic
* remove unnecessary feature
---------
Co-authored-by: Eduard S. <eduardsanou@posteo.net>
* Serialization tests now pass again
* Tidy up and test more edge-cases
* Use attributes rather than custom serializer for arrays
* Add JSON Schema support
* Tests for JSON Schema generation and validation
* Add comments
* Support custom predicates
* Clippy fixes
* Make deserialization/constructor functions pub(crate)
* unify fe/be NativeOp and NativePred
* remove Origin in favour of PodId
* Combine string and hash in Key
* use middleware::AnchoredKey in frontend
* merge frontend/middleware types
* refactor custom predicates
* clean up a bit
* fix middleware custom tests
* clean up
* clean up 2
* add acronyms in typos list
* Contains should take three arguments (root, key, value)
* Add a test for frontend Dictionaries
* Separate frontend and middleware operations
* Make tests pass: add arg to contains
* Cargo fmt
* Merkleproof verify circuit (#143)
* merkletree: add keypath circuit
* merkletree-circuit: implement proof of existence verification in-circuit
* parametrize max_depth at the tree circuit
* Constrain selectors in-circuit
* implement merketree nonexistence proof circuit, and add edgecase tests
* add non-existence proofs documentation in the mdbook, mv EMPTY->EMPTY_VALUE & NULL->EMPTY_HASH, dependency clean and public exposure methods
* review comments, some extra polishing and add a test that expects wrong proofs to fail
* Add circuit to check only merkleproofs-of-existence
With this, the merkletree_circuit module offers two different circuits:
- `MerkleProofCircuit`: allows to verify both proofs of existence and proofs
non-existence with the same circuit.
- `MerkleProofExistenceCircuit`: allows to verify proofs of existence only.
In this way, if only proofs of existence are needed,
`MerkleProofExistenceCircuit` should be used, which requires less amount
of constraints than `MerkleProofCircuit`.
* Code review
---------
Co-authored-by: Ahmad <root@ahmadafuni.com>
* Towards Contains/NotContains in middleware and backend
* Fix build
* Adding error handling to deal with op compile introduce extra ops
* Incorporate Merkle proofs into MockMainPod
* Merkleproof verify circuit (#143)
* merkletree: add keypath circuit
* merkletree-circuit: implement proof of existence verification in-circuit
* parametrize max_depth at the tree circuit
* Constrain selectors in-circuit
* implement merketree nonexistence proof circuit, and add edgecase tests
* add non-existence proofs documentation in the mdbook, mv EMPTY->EMPTY_VALUE & NULL->EMPTY_HASH, dependency clean and public exposure methods
* review comments, some extra polishing and add a test that expects wrong proofs to fail
* Add circuit to check only merkleproofs-of-existence
With this, the merkletree_circuit module offers two different circuits:
- `MerkleProofCircuit`: allows to verify both proofs of existence and proofs
non-existence with the same circuit.
- `MerkleProofExistenceCircuit`: allows to verify proofs of existence only.
In this way, if only proofs of existence are needed,
`MerkleProofExistenceCircuit` should be used, which requires less amount
of constraints than `MerkleProofCircuit`.
* Code review
---------
Co-authored-by: Ahmad <root@ahmadafuni.com>
* Towards Contains/NotContains in middleware and backend
* Frontend compound types -- allow one frontend operation to produce multiple middleware statements (in progress)
* Incorporate Merkle proofs into MockMainPod
* Incorporate Merkle proof op arg into frontend
* Compile one statement to many, in progress
* Fix remaining tests
* Minor clean-up
* Oops I did a bunch of work in the middle of a rebase, committing
* Incorporate Merkle proof op arg into frontend
* still working on frontend compound types, refactor compile() to output multiple statements
* Contains statements for frontend types: code compiles
* Tests pass
* Examples use front-end compound types
* Remove old Contains and NotContains from frontend
* Add nin to typos
* Code review
---------
Co-authored-by: arnaucube <git@arnaucube.com>
Co-authored-by: Ahmad <root@ahmadafuni.com>
* merkletree: add keypath circuit
* merkletree-circuit: implement proof of existence verification in-circuit
* parametrize max_depth at the tree circuit
* Constrain selectors in-circuit
* implement merketree nonexistence proof circuit, and add edgecase tests
* add non-existence proofs documentation in the mdbook, mv EMPTY->EMPTY_VALUE & NULL->EMPTY_HASH, dependency clean and public exposure methods
* review comments, some extra polishing and add a test that expects wrong proofs to fail
* Add circuit to check only merkleproofs-of-existence
With this, the merkletree_circuit module offers two different circuits:
- `MerkleProofCircuit`: allows to verify both proofs of existence and proofs
non-existence with the same circuit.
- `MerkleProofExistenceCircuit`: allows to verify proofs of existence only.
In this way, if only proofs of existence are needed,
`MerkleProofExistenceCircuit` should be used, which requires less amount
of constraints than `MerkleProofCircuit`.
* Code review
---------
Co-authored-by: Ahmad <root@ahmadafuni.com>
* sync spec & code
* move primitives (merkletree) into the backend
* comment on the ops spec and link to issue #108
* typo
* fix github-ci mdbook-publish pages
At the middleware we were defining some types that actually are dependant on the
backend no matter how we define them in the middleware.
For example, we were hardcoding the `Hash` and `Value` types and their related
behaviour (eg. `.to_fields()`) to be based on the length of 4 field elements,
but that's not a choice of the middleware, and in fact this is determined by the
backend itself. On the same time, those types and related methods do not belong
to the backend, since conceptually they are part of the middleware reasoning.
The intention of this PR is not to prematurely abstract the library, but to
avoid inconsistencies where a type or parameter is defined in the middleware to
have certain carachteristic and later in the backend it gets used differently.
The idea is that those types and parameters (eg. lengths) have a single source
of truth in the code; and in the case of the "base types" (hash, value, etc)
this is determined by the backend being used under the hood, not by a choice of
the middleware parameters.
The idea with this approach, is that the frontend & middleware should not need
to import the proving library used by the backend (eg. plonky2, plonky3, etc).
As mentioned earlier, the `Hash` and `Value` types are types belonging at the
middleware, and is the middleware who reasons about them, but depending on the
backend being used, the `Hash` and `Value` types will have different sizes. So
it's the backend being used who actually defines their nature under the hood.
For example with a plonky2 backend, these types will have a length of 4 field
elements, whereas with a plonky3 backend they will have a length of 8 field
eleements.
Note that his approach does not introduce new traits or abstract code, just
makes use of rust features to define 'base types' that are being used in the
middleware.
* wip
* prototype custom predicates 1b
* feat: implement custom pred recursion
* files reorg, add github CI for rustfmt checks
* start sparsemerkletree. impl add_leaf method, initial Leaf & Intermediate types with methods
* mt: add hash computation of all the nodes in the tree, add method to print the tree to visualize it as a graphviz
* mt: add (till the leaf) method which is used by get,contains,prove methods
* mt: add verify (of inclusion) method
* mt: update 'down' method to reuse siblings, update get,contains,prove methods (the three use 'down' under the hood)
* Add nonexistence proofs and iterator
* Add iterator test
* migrate usage of old merkletree to the new merkletree impl in POD2 code
---------
Co-authored-by: Eduard S. <eduardsanou@posteo.net>
Co-authored-by: Ahmad <root@ahmadafuni.com>
* Implement Containers (Dictionary,Set,Array) on top of MerkleTree. And restructure the code.
- Reorganize the code grouping backends, middleware, frontend, (crypto) primitives.
- Add types Dictionary,Set,Array at the middleware layer, so that
it can be used both by the backend and frontend. The Dictionary, Set,
Array use the merkletree differently as specified at
f2575d1524/book/src/values.md (dictionary-array-set)
- The containers introduce the trait Container, which has the
method 'cm()'. At the current version this uses a merkletree
under the hood, and the method 'cm' returns the merkle root.
- Ideally neither frontend nor backend use the MerkleTree type, and they
use the wrappers {Dictionary,Set,Array}. Note that the current commit
the MerkleTree is used at the mock-backend to check internal values, but
not at the struct types.
- updated the spec's merkletree section updating the defined interface
- add github ci to run the tests
---------
Co-authored-by: Ahmad Afuni <root@ahmadafuni.com>
Co-authored-by: Eduard S. <eduardsanou@posteo.net>
