1993-11-18 - Re: All our eggs in one basket?

Header Data

From: jim@bilbo.suite.com (Jim Miller)
To: cypherpunks@toad.com
Message Hash: d81a98989f083384c12dba691ab0cf0559346a9a87a7a449d7ea399572a1178f
Message ID: <9311182106.AA19057@bilbo.suite.com>
Reply To: N/A
UTC Datetime: 1993-11-18 21:08:48 UTC
Raw Date: Thu, 18 Nov 93 13:08:48 PST

Raw message

From: jim@bilbo.suite.com (Jim Miller)
Date: Thu, 18 Nov 93 13:08:48 PST
To: cypherpunks@toad.com
Subject: Re: All our eggs in one basket?
Message-ID: <9311182106.AA19057@bilbo.suite.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain



> What would happen if your bank suddenly told you that it had no proof that
> you really had an account there?
> 

> Wonderer
> 


Theoretically, this problem is prevented by using protocols that incorporate  
non-repudiation mechanisms.  The bank wound not be able to make such a claim.   
Or, another way of saying it,  were the bank to make such a claim, you would be  
able to prove them wrong.  


However, proving them wrong while also retaining your anonymity may be a trick.   
It would depend on the design of the non-repudiation mechanisms.

How do you prove to a third party that someone is falsely repudiating a valid  
contract or transaction without revealing any information about yourself?

Conversely, how do you defend yourself against false claims of repudiation  
without revealing any information about yourself?  After all, someone might try  
to discover your identity by making false claims about you, and forcing you to  
defend yourself.  (Sound familiar?)


Jim_Miller@suite.com






Thread