@claudiorlandi @rbkhmrcr @AarhusUni @uclisec Abstract:
* QuisQuis provides both a relatively small state footprint with comparison to ever growing chains Zcash & Monero (similar to Bitcoin UTXO set)
* QuisQuis provides plausible deniability - a user can deny he's part of a tx (in contrast to Zcash, similar to Monero)
* QuisQuis provides both a relatively small state footprint with comparison to ever growing chains Zcash & Monero (similar to Bitcoin UTXO set)
* QuisQuis provides plausible deniability - a user can deny he's part of a tx (in contrast to Zcash, similar to Monero)
@claudiorlandi @rbkhmrcr @AarhusUni @uclisec Proofs are reasonably computationally light (much lighter than Zcash's zk-SNARKs), and small in size (~13kb, still larger than Monero's post-bulletproofs which are 3.7kb).
@claudiorlandi @rbkhmrcr @AarhusUni @uclisec Me:
Scalability (smaller state footprint): better than #Zcash & #Monero, definitely not better than #MimbleWimble.
Privacy: same as Monero & MW, worse than Zcash in theory, better than Zcash in practice (small usage of shielded txs due to overhead).
CC: @grinMW @beamprivacy
Scalability (smaller state footprint): better than #Zcash & #Monero, definitely not better than #MimbleWimble.
Privacy: same as Monero & MW, worse than Zcash in theory, better than Zcash in practice (small usage of shielded txs due to overhead).
CC: @grinMW @beamprivacy
