1993-03-12 - CASH/BANK: combo

Header Data

From: Karl Barrus <elee9sf@Menudo.UH.EDU>
To: cypherpunks@toad.com
Message Hash: 94c3eaafe821a8bccc6ef211598cba15a38952eda4ef1ccfeeb34c4c9859dd3e
Message ID: <199303120616.AA20557@Menudo.UH.EDU>
Reply To: N/A
UTC Datetime: 1993-03-12 06:17:22 UTC
Raw Date: Thu, 11 Mar 93 22:17:22 PST

Raw message

From: Karl Barrus <elee9sf@Menudo.UH.EDU>
Date: Thu, 11 Mar 93 22:17:22 PST
To: cypherpunks@toad.com
Subject: CASH/BANK: combo
Message-ID: <199303120616.AA20557@Menudo.UH.EDU>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain


Hal saw through my laziness attempt: I thought it would be "easiest"
for a cash accepting remailer to increment an account (marking bills
as spent) and have users request more bills from the bank rather that
filter requests through me.  However, this does lead to a perpetually
full bank account...

But actually, a full service bank isn't required (although maybe that
would be nice) - all that's really needed is for the remailer software
to compare the included digicash versus a spent cash list and a valid
cash list.  The banking portion need only be one command for me to
use: one that deposits newly created cash into the valid cash list.
When a letter arrives, the digicash is checked, added to the spent
cash list, and re-routed.

For privacy, requests for digicash could come to me via anonymous
remailers, along with the appropriate header to allow me to respond.
This would render logs relating digicash and user useless, since I
wouldn't know who is requesting digicash bills.  On the other hand,
somebody could store up several digicash bills by routing their
request through the various remailers.  But I'll accept that risk,
hoping that nobody on this list would prepare a email attack (except
for the unfortunate folks who can't seem to unsubscribe :-) 

| Karl L. Barrus                    |
| elee9sf@menudo.uh.edu             | <- preferred address
| barrus@tree.egr.uh.edu (NeXTMail) |
Version: 2.2