1

We can say that, when compared to a Merkle tree, inclusion proofs are constant size by membership witness. Can we say that also for exclusion proofs by non-membership witness?

Is there any advantage of non-membership witness in an accumulator?

Alin Tomescu
  • 1,003
  • 10
  • 30
jhdm
  • 187
  • 6

1 Answers1

0

In accumulators based on groups of unknown order (such as RSA or class groups) or accumulators based on bilinear pairings, both membership and non-membership proofs are constant-sized (i.e. independent of the size of the set and the size of the subset you are proving membership/non-membership for).

Mathdropout
  • 300
  • 1
  • 7