Question to MPC and how we can catch up?

Hi @Eve, thank you for your thoughtful questions. Will try to answer to the point:

Do you think that Enigma can catch up on the development of other MPC projects?

Based on my understanding, other projects are blowing their work on MPC out of proportions. Even though some are claiming to build ‘privacy networks’ based on MPC, in practice their work is localized to 1-2 specific use-cases where MPC is easier to implement and is scalable today. Usually, those use case are either threshold signatures or generating shared randomness.

Both of these use cases are interesting, and I do see them being incorporated to the Enigma network as well (e.g., see this - https://forum.scrt.network/t/threshold-ecdsa-signatures-with-cheater-identification), but they don’t allow for general purpose privacy-preserving computation (far far from it). I can also see other localized use cases for MPC in the medium-to-long term, but we will let the market decide whether these are things we should implement or not.

Where does Enigma see itself about MPC?

Beyond what I mentioned above - about us incorporating specific MPC functionalities based on market needs, I actually see Enigma as providing the first market-ready, general-purpose, secure multi-party computation platform. Remember that the problem of MPC is defined as a system that can accept private inputs from multiple parties and correctly compute a result out of them without revealing those inputs to anyone (i.e., each user does not learn anything beyond what they contributed to the system). Enigma, through the use of TEEs, enables exactly that!

5 Likes