1995-10-20 - Re: digital cash and identity disclosure

Header Data

From: Holger.Reif@PrakInf.TU-Ilmenau.DE (Holger Reif )
To: wilcoxb@nag.cs.colorado.edu
Message Hash: f41f8bf4286e95f8f2c78a26960f2fee56ae85af322538315d90bf07278e33e2
Message ID: <9510200933.AA02681@PrakInf.TU-Ilmenau.DE>
Reply To: N/A
UTC Datetime: 1995-10-20 09:34:18 UTC
Raw Date: Fri, 20 Oct 95 02:34:18 PDT

Raw message

From: Holger.Reif@PrakInf.TU-Ilmenau.DE (Holger Reif )
Date: Fri, 20 Oct 95 02:34:18 PDT
To: wilcoxb@nag.cs.colorado.edu
Subject: Re: digital cash and identity disclosure
Message-ID: <9510200933.AA02681@PrakInf.TU-Ilmenau.DE>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain


Scott Brickner writes:
>Andreas Bogk writes:
>>But as far as I got Chaums idea, Alice would not reveal Bobs identity,
>>but rather her own. Am I missing a point here?
>
>You're right.  Tim's wrong.  Bob can't spend the money Alice gave him
>without depositing it in the bank and getting new money issued.  Each
>coin has "This money was issued to Alice" as an invisible imprint which
>only shows up when two coins with the same serial number are together.

I don't understand how this could happen? The two coins are identical
(as I understood it from the tech backgound of ecash). what has a double-
spended coin what a copied single-spended coin not has?

Forgive if I missed relevant postings to this subject since I only read
parts from the list offline.


read you later  -  Holger Reif
http://remus.prakinf.tu-ilmenau.de/Reif/







Thread