feat(stm): add missing off circuit checks - #3480
Open
damrobi wants to merge 6 commits into
Open
Conversation
damrobi
force-pushed
the
damrobi/msnark/3381-add-off-circuit-checks
branch
from
August 14, 2026 16:08
8233f3e to
b082171
Compare
damrobi
marked this pull request as ready for review
August 14, 2026 16:09
damrobi
requested review from
curiecrypt,
hjeljeli32 and
jpraynaud
as code owners
August 14, 2026 16:09
hjeljeli32
reviewed
Aug 19, 2026
hjeljeli32
left a comment
Collaborator
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Good initial work 👍 . I left 2 comments.
damrobi
force-pushed
the
damrobi/msnark/3381-add-off-circuit-checks
branch
from
August 20, 2026 09:18
99e2d7b to
1da401e
Compare
This file contains hidden or bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
Content
This PR includes the addition of some missing off circuit checks. The goal of those checks is to prevent a prover from trying to create a proof that will fail to verify since the proof creation is a very expensive operations.
Changes
protocol_parameters == next_protocol_parametersfor the values coming from the rolling state. An update of the parameters would break the recursive proof.Pre-submit checklist
Comments
Issue(s)
Closes #3381