Fw: Your paper on criminal contracts I notice that you have a recent paper published at: The Ring of Gyges: Investigating the Future of Criminal Smart Contracts | Request PDFSee the Abstract below.https://www.researchgate.net/publication/310821111_The_Ring_of_Gyges_Investigating_the_Future_of_Criminal_Smart_Contracts
https://eprint.iacr.org/2016/358 https://eprint.iacr.org/2016/358.pdf Google: ' "Juels" "kosba" shi ' Also see: https://lists.cpunks.org/pipermail/cypherpunks/2015-September/024894.html It isn't clear that you distinguish between victimless crimes (malum prohibitum) and crimes-with-victims (malum in se.) As you may recall, I am the author of the Assassination Politics essay, https://cryptome.org/ap.htm I have advocated the implementation of that system, primarily (initially) for the purpose of eliminating all governments. Naturally, such governments would likely want to label any such system as being "criminal". How else would they hope to prevent it from destroying them? You may be aware that in July of 2018, a death-prediction market was implemented on Ethereum/Augur, see the Forecast Foundation. https://www.augur.net/faq/ Google: ' "ethereum" "augur" "assassination" ' While that new system has current characteristics which make it unlikely that there will be any assassinations associated with it under its current practices, nevertheless, that does not mean that modifications won't be done to achieve the goals that my AP essay. Have you addressed this matter? I am posting this on the Cypherpunks mail list. Jim Bell × AbstractThanks to their anonymity (pseudonymity) and elimination of trusted intermediaries, cryptocurrencies such as Bitcoin have created or stimulated growth in many businesses and communities. Unfortunately, some of these are criminal, e.g., money laundering, illicit marketplaces, and ransomware. Next-generation cryptocurrencies such as Ethereum will include rich scripting languages in support of smart contracts, programs that autonomously intermediate transactions. In this paper, we explore the risk of smart contracts fueling new criminal ecosystems. Specifically, we show how what we call criminal smart contracts (CSCs) can facilitate leakage of confidential information, theft of cryptographic keys, and various real-world crimes (murder, arson, terrorism). We show that CSCs for leakage of secrets (a la Wikileaks) are efficiently realizable in existing scripting languages such as that in Ethereum. We show that CSCs for theft of cryptographic keys can be achieved using primitives, such as Succinct Non-interactive ARguments of Knowledge (SNARKs), that are already expressible in these languages and for which efficient supporting language extensions are anticipated. We show similarly that authenticated data feeds, an emerging feature of smart contract systems, can facilitate CSCs for real-world crimes (e.g., property crimes). Our results highlight the urgency of creating policy and technical safeguards against CSCs in order to realize the promise of smart contracts for beneficial goals. [end of Abstract] ×
