At 10:23 PM +0200 10/20/05, Daniel A. Nagy wrote:
The referred 1988
paper proposes an off-line system
Please. You can just as easily do an on-line system, and still have blind
signatures, including m=m=2 shared secret signature hiding to prevent
double spending.
In fact, the *only* viable way to
On Thu, Oct 20, 2005 at 07:34:34PM -0400, R.A. Hettinga wrote:
At 12:32 AM +0200 10/21/05, Daniel A. Nagy wrote:
Could you give us a reference to this one, please?
Google is your friend, dude.
Before making unitary global claims like you just did, you might consider
consulting the
At 2:36 AM +0200 10/21/05, Daniel A. Nagy wrote:
With all due respect, this was unnecessarily rude, unfair and unwarranted.
This is the *cypherpunks* list, guy... :-)
Silvio Micali is a very prolific author and he published more than one paper
on more than one exchange protocol
And I just got
At 12:32 AM +0200 10/21/05, Daniel A. Nagy wrote:
Could you give us a reference to this one, please?
Google is your friend, dude.
Before making unitary global claims like you just did, you might consider
consulting the literature. It's out there.
Cheers,
RAH
--
-
R. A.
They won't be changing it:
http://googleblog.blogspot.com/2005/09/googlebombing-failure.html
On 10/21/05, Steve Schear [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Quick, before they change it: search Google using the term failure
(without the quotes)
On Thu, Oct 20, 2005 at 05:19:49PM -0400, R.A. Hettinga wrote:
BTW, you can exchange cash for goods, or other chaumian bearer certificates
-- or receipts, for that matter, with a simple exchange protocol. Micali
did one for email ten years ago, for instance.
Could you give us a reference to
Quick, before they change it: search Google using the term failure
(without the quotes)
At 6:22 PM -0700 10/20/05, Steve Schear wrote:
Quick, before they change it: search Google using the term failure
Yawn. That, or something like it, has been there for years, Steve...
Cheers,
RAH
--
-
R. A. Hettinga mailto: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
The Internet Bearer Underwriting
As far as the issue of receipts in Chaumian ecash, there have been a
couple of approaches discussed.
The simplest goes like this. If Alice will pay Bob, Bob supplies Alice
with a blinded proto-coin, along with a signed statement, I will
perform service X if Alice supplies me with a mint signature
Date: Thu, 20 Oct 2005 11:31:39 -0700
From: cyphrpunk [EMAIL PROTECTED]
2. Cash payments are final. After the fact, the paying party has no
means to reverse the payment. We call this property of cash
transactions _irreversibility_.
Certainly Chaum ecash has this property. Because
On Thu, Oct 20, 2005 at 03:36:54PM -0700, cyphrpunk wrote:
As far as the issue of receipts in Chaumian ecash, there have been a
couple of approaches discussed.
The simplest goes like this. If Alice will pay Bob, Bob supplies Alice
with a blinded proto-coin, along with a signed statement, I
On 10/20/05, Daniel A. Nagy [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Thu, Oct 20, 2005 at 03:36:54PM -0700, cyphrpunk wrote:
As far as the issue of receipts in Chaumian ecash, there have been a
couple of approaches discussed.
The simplest goes like this. If Alice will pay Bob, Bob supplies Alice
Cyphrpunk wrote...
The notion that someone who is willing to spend months in jail just to
keep a promise of silence needs killing is beyond bizarre and is
downright evil. This list supports the rights of individuals to tell
the government to go to hell, and that is exactly what Judy Miller
On 10/20/05, R.A. Hettinga [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
At 12:32 AM +0200 10/21/05, Daniel A. Nagy wrote:
Could you give us a reference to this one, please?
Google is your friend, dude.
Before making unitary global claims like you just did, you might consider
consulting the literature. It's out
14 matches
Mail list logo
