Skip to content
NewA calmer, faster ZeroHour

Guppy: Efficient Light Clients via Recursive Zero-Knowledge Proofs

arXiv cs.CRby George Danezis ()1 min read3 · 3 reads
AI summary · glm-5.3-flashSummaries by Vani AI

Guppy lets blockchain light clients verify full state via recursive zero-knowledge proofs without validators maintaining state commitments, processing thousands of updates per second.

Guppy is a light-client protocol in which validators commit only to state updates while an off-chain, untrusted service secured by recursive zero-knowledge proofs maintains a verifiable Merkle tree over the full state. A hash-chain commitment moves validator signature verification out of the proving circuit, and a parallel recursive proving pipeline keeps latency growth logarithmic with throughput. A Plonky2-based implementation maintains a tree of size 2^30 while processing thousands of updates per second, adding only 2-4 seconds of latency without increasing block-construction complexity.

Key facts
  • Validators commit only to state updates, not full state trees.
  • Off-chain service secured by recursive ZKPs maintains a verifiable Merkle tree.
  • Hash-chain commitment moves signature verification out of the proving circuit.
  • Plonky2 implementation handles 2^30-entry trees at thousands of updates per second.
  • Proving latency grows only logarithmically; added latency is 2-4 seconds.
Analyze this story with Vani AIImpact, who is affected and what defenders should do, in a new chat

From the original article

1 min read at arxiv.org

Traditional light clients rely on validators committing to the entire blockchain state at every block via a state commitment such as a Merkle tree, allowing clients to verify facts using short proofs. However, maintaining large and ever-growing state trees imposes a significant burden on validators and lies on the critical path of block production.

arXiv cs.CR

By George Danezis · arxiv.org

Read the full article at arXiv cs.CR

A short excerpt; the article and its images belong to the publisher. Summary, key facts and assessment above are AI-written from the article and can be wrong.