So back in 1999, in an ecash thread on cypherpunks I claimed:
http://marc.info/?l=cypherpunksm=95280154629900w=2
I wouldn't say ecash has to use blinding, but I would argue it would be a
misuse of the word ecash, if something which was revocable were dubbed
ecash.
This was in the context of
On Tue, May 14, 2013 at 01:51:51PM +0200, Adam Back wrote:
Adam Back in Sep 1999, cypherpunks list:
I wouldn't say ecash has to use blinding, but I would argue it would be a
misuse of the word ecash, if something which was revocable were dubbed
ecash.
So I still think that is an important point.
Adam,
Take a look at this privacy enhancing solution based on fair exchange
implemented by bitcoin contracts and cut-and-choose. It would require a
public pool of users willing to exchange in common denominations at
moments in time together to ensure unlinkability. It also leave a trace
of
On Tue, May 14, 2013 at 5:25 AM, Adam Back a...@cypherspace.org wrote:
On Mon, May 13, 2013 at 06:00:27PM -0400, Jeff Garzik wrote:
When a transaction's input value exceeds its output value, the
remainder is the transaction fee. The miner's reward for processing
transactions is the 25 BTC
report: https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=205349.0
Every talk will be widely witnessed and videotaped so we can get some
reasonably good security by simply putting out PGP fingerprints in our
slides. Yeah, some fancy attacker could change the videos after the
fact, but the talks themselves
On 14 May 2013 20:41, Peter Todd p...@petertodd.org wrote:
report: https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=205349.0
Every talk will be widely witnessed and videotaped so we can get some
reasonably good security by simply putting out PGP fingerprints in our
slides. Yeah, some fancy attacker
On Tue, May 14, 2013 at 09:16:28PM +0200, Melvin Carvalho wrote:
FWIW I take this stuff pretty seriously myself. I generated my key
securely in the first place, I use a hardware smartcard to store my PGP
key, and I keep the master signing key - the key with the ability to
sign other keys -
On Tue, May 14, 2013 at 9:16 PM, Melvin Carvalho
melvincarva...@gmail.com wrote:
Just out of curiosity, could PGP keyservers suffer from a similar 51% attack
as the bitcoin network?
Well, no, and yes. It doesn't work like that.
If you have your own domain, you can store your key there as a TXT
On Tue, May 14, 2013 at 12:50:27PM -0400, Jeff Garzik wrote:
Well if it is a later transaction, not an integral part of the reward
transaction (that is definitionally mined by being serialized into the
coinbase), the user may elect to withhold the promised transaction
give-to-miner, so thats
On Tue, May 14, 2013 at 09:39:46PM +0200, Harald Schilly wrote:
If you have your own domain, you can store your key there as a TXT entry.
$ dig +short harald._pka.schil.ly. TXT
and even use it automatically:
$ gpg … --auto-key-locate pka -r email@address.domain
Nice. But we all kow about the
10 matches
Mail list logo
