back and forth (typically 2048 bits each)
for every bit of your password. I'll bet the actual paper has a much
more clever scheme which improves the efficiency and has a nice proof
of security. I'm looking forward to seeing it.
Hal Finney
Nikita Borisov and Ian Goldberg have released
Off-the-Record Messaging (http://www.xelerance.com/mirror/otr/),
It looks like Ian Goldberg's site might be a more authoritative source,
http://www.cypherpunks.ca/otr/ .
One interesting feature is authentication + deniability. You know who
you are
Ben Laurie writes:
How do you make the payment already gone without using a third party?
Of course there has to be a third party in the form of the currency
issuer. If it is someone like e-gold, they could do as I suggested and
add a feature where the buyer could transfer funds irrevocably into
Enzo Michelangeli writes:
In the world of international trade, where mutual distrust between buyer
and seller is often the rule and there is no central authority to enforce
the law, this is traditionally achieved by interposing not less than three
trusted third parties: the shipping line, the
Tyler Durden writes:
So my newbie-style question is, is there an eGold that can be verified, but
not accessed, until a 'release' code is sent?
In other words, say I'm buying some hacker-ed code and pay in egold. I don't
want them to be able to 'cash' the gold until I have the code.
There was a brief mention of this technology at the Crypto conference.
I provided some pointers in a comment to an Ed Felten blog entry at
http://www.freedom-to-tinker.com/archives/000677.html#comments (scroll
down to the 3rd comment).
Dan Boneh et al presented a proposal for a group signature
secrets or CAs.
I don't think anonymous is the right word for this, and I hope the
IETF comes up with a better one as they go forward.
Hal Finney
the signature under
different keys and see which one worked.
Hal Finney
Spam is the least of the problems for remailers when it comes to
abuse. You should be more concerned about possible liability for
illegal messages.
In a way, spam has actually made the remailer operator's life easier
as people today are used to receiving annoying and obscene email.
Ten years
will invalidate
any RPOW tokens which people have previously created. So don't go too
crazy hoarding up RPOWs quite yet.
Thanks very much -
Hal Finney
the threat from the ISP to another operator. The difference
I suppose is that the forwarder would be selling privacy services, hence
different ones would compete to get a good reputation. Any cheating might
be detected by insider whistle blowers or perhaps some kind of audit.
Hal Finney
11 matches
Mail list logo
