Publicly verifiable proofs of sequential work

We construct a publicly verifiable protocol for proving computational work based on collision-resistant hash functions and a new plausible complexity assumption regarding the existence of "inherently sequential" hash functions. Our protocol is based on a novel construction of time-lock puzzles. Given a sampled "puzzle" P getsr D_n, where $n$ is the security parameter and D_n is the distribution of the puzzles, a corresponding "solution" can be generated using N evaluations of the sequential hash function, where N>n is another parameter, while any feasible adversarial strategy for generating valid solutions must take at least as much time as Ω(N) serial evaluations of the hash function after receiving $P$. Thus, valid solutions constitute a "proof" that Ω(N) parallel time elapsed since p was received. Solutions can be publicly and efficiently verified in time poly(n) ⋅ polylog(N). Applications of these "time-lock puzzles" include noninteractive timestamping of documents (where the distribution over the possible documents corresponds to the puzzle distribution D_n) and universally verifiable CPU benchmarks. Our construction is secure in the standard model under complexity assumptions (collision-resistant hash functions and inherently sequential hash functions), and makes black-box use of the underlying primitives. Consequently, the corresponding construction in the random oracle model is secure unconditionally. Moreover, as it is a public-coin protocol, it can be made non-interactive in the random oracle model using the Fiat-Shamir Heuristic.

Our construction makes a novel use of "depth-robust" directed acyclic graphs---ones whose depth remains large even after removing a constant fraction of vertices---which were previously studied for the purpose of complexity lower-bounds. The construction bypasses a recent lower-bound of Mahmoody, Moran, and Vadhan (CRYPTO '11) for time-lock puzzles in the random oracle model, which showed that it is impossible to have time-lock puzzles like ours in the random oracle model if the puzzle generator also computes a solution together with the puzzle.