Benchmarking Zero-Knowledge Proof-Based Authentication Protocols

Abstract

Zero-Knowledge Proof (ZKP) protocols offer a powerful foundation for privacy-preserving authentication by allowing one party to prove knowledge of a secret without revealing it. Such protocols are increasingly relevant in domains such as secure communications, blockchain technologies, digital identity management, and e-health, where data confidentiality and integrity are critical. While various ZKP schemes exist, their practical performance remains a key factor in choosing the appropriate protocol for real-world applications, since efficiency directly impacts scalability, user experience, and system adoption.In this work, we conduct a comparative benchmarking study of five no table ZKP-based authentication protocols: Fiat–Shamir, Zero-Knowledge Succinct Non-Interactive Argument of Knowledge (zk-SNARK), Zero-Knowledge Scalable Transparent Argument of Knowledge, (zk-STARK), Schnorr, and Guillou–Quisquater. Each protocol is evaluated in a standardized virtualized environment to ensure fair comparisons across implementations. We measure and analyze multiple performance metrics, including prover and verifier execution time, Central Processing Unit (CPU) and memory consumption, and network usage per proof. Our results reveal significant differences in resource efficiency, highlighting trade-offs between computational cost, proof size, and cryptographic expressiveness.This study provides a systematic evaluation clarifying the relative strengths and weaknesses of widely used ZKP protocols, serving as a practical reference for researchers, practitioners, and system designers seeking to integrate zero-knowledge techniques under real-world performance constraints.