sorryfreeLast reviewed 2026-09-13

Proof systems and computational proofs

Direct answerFrameworks for machine-checking the cryptographic argument itself: knowledge soundness of a polynomial IOP, the security reduction of a KEM, or the game-hopping proof in a paper. These work in the computational model, where the adversary is a probabilistic polynomial-time algorithm and security is a concrete bound, and they are the only tools on this index that verify the proof system rather than the circuit inside it.

A verified circuit is only as good as the proof system that compiles it. Sum-check, FRI, STIR and WHIR, Fiat-Shamir transforms and polynomial commitment schemes all carry pen-and-paper soundness proofs that have historically contained errors. Two families of tools address this. ArkLib formalizes interactive oracle reductions and their composition in Lean 4, targeting the SNARK components the Ethereum Foundation cares about. EasyCrypt, CryptoVerif and SSProve are general computational provers, used for KEMs, signatures, TLS and, in one production case, a ZK verifier's honesty proof.

Expect these projects to be slower and more research-shaped than circuit verification. The payoff is that they close the gap between a verified circuit and a verified system, which is why the Ethereum Foundation's 2025 zkEVM security roadmap requires a formal soundness argument for recursion by the end of 2026.

Frameworks in this category

FrameworkTargetsApproachAccessStatus
ArkLib
Verified-zkEVM (Quang Dao et al., Ethereum Foundation)
Interactive oracle reductionsSum-checkPolynomial commitmentsFRI / STIR / WHIRFiat-ShamirBCSLean 4 with VCV-io for probabilistic reasoning; completeness and soundness of proof-system componentsOpen sourceActive; Nethermind maintains an ArkLibFri fork
EasyCrypt
Formosa Crypto (MPI-SP, Inria, Boston University, TU/e, Porto, Radboud)
KEMs and signatures (ML-KEM, X-Wing)Hash functions (SHA-3)Curve arithmetic (X25519)ZK verifiersInteractive prover for game-based, code-based security proofs over probabilistic programs; paired with Jasmin for verified implementationsOpen sourceActive, mature
CryptoVerif
Bruno Blanchet, Inria (Prosecco)
Protocols: TLS 1.3, Signal, WireGuardKey exchangeAuthenticated encryption compositionsAutomatic and guided sequences of games with concrete security boundsOpen sourceActive, mature
SSProve
Aarhus University, MPI-SP and others
Primitives and protocols in the computational modelRocq framework for state-separating proofs; hax backend availableOpen sourceActive research
ProofFrog
Ross Evans, Douglas Stebila (University of Waterloo)
Game-based security proofs (papers)Custom language (FrogLang) and checker for game transitions; MCP server for AI assistantsOpen sourceResearch (2025)
Squirrel
Inria (Bana-Comon logic)
ProtocolsInteractive prover in the computationally complete symbolic attacker modelOpen sourceActive research

How to choose

Firms that do this work

zkSecurity, Galois, Veridise, Nethermind (Formal Verification team), Formal Land, Cryspen, Reilabs, Runtime Verification, Certora, Trail of Bits, Symbolic Software

Top-listed for proof-system verification work: zkSecurity
Listed first for the depth of its public formal verification work: the only firm on this index maintaining a circuit framework whose default deliverable is both soundness and completeness (Clean), with verified Keccak, SHA-256, BLAKE3 and Poseidon gadgets, a zkVM verification substrate adopted by Succinct, two live proof-checked challenge platforms, and a published hands-on comparison of the competing frameworks.
Read the zkSecurity profile · Website

Other categories

ZK circuit verification, Symbolic protocol analysis, Verified implementations, Proof assistants and general verifiers, Challenges and programs