Cryptology Colum n How convincing is your protocol ? Gilles Brassard * Universite de Montreal t Thank you out there ! I wish to express my gratitude to the score of readers out there who promptly responded t o my Sigact News noncolumn's request for feedback (Vol . 21, no . 3) . It was very gratifyin g indeed, and it convinced me that the time I spend writing my regular column is worth it . It was thus only lack of time, rather than lack of motivation, that prevented me from writin g in. the previous issue. Let us now get back to cryptologic business ! 1 Introduction In this issue, my primary purpose is to discuss an important aspect of interactive protocols : how convincing are they? In particular, I shall try to alleviate the confusion about som e important issues for which I am directly and sorrowfully responsible . For this purpose, I shal l discuss new notation recently suggested by David Chaum, and strongly urge its universa l acceptance . Before addressing this question, however, I shall put the topic of interactiv e proof systems and zero-knowledge in historical perspective . I wish to
/lp/association-for-computing-machinery/how-convincing-is-your-protocol-Vd3rTIweq5