Honest players in ZKP proofs Trying to study ZKPs, I have seen that proofs qualify players (a part from -of course- simulator and extractor): so honest prover, honest verifier.
Is it needed because usually examples deal with interactive schemas which require players to act in specific ways (so it's not needed when Fiat-Shamir heuristic is used on sigma-protocols to get non-interactive flavours)? Or are there more technical, subtle reasons?
Thanks!
In the example you mentioned, you must have an honest verifier, because a dishonest verifier would be able to extract the witness (see).
It is important to remark that there are transformations from honest to dishonest protocols, therefore studying honest protocols makes sense in practice. You may find this useful.