Other Directory Sites: SeekWonder | Directory Owners Forum
The following archive was created by hippie-mail 7.98617-22 on Sat Apr 10 1999 - 01:18:50
Lucky Green (shamrock@netcom.com)
Tue, 09 Mar 1999 20:17:45 -0800
Anon wrote:
> -----Original Message-----
> From: owner-CodherPlunks@toad.com [mailto:owner-CodherPlunks@toad.com]On
> Behalf Of Anonymous
> Sent: Monday, March 08, 1999 10:21
> To: CodherPlunks@toad.com; brands@xs4all.nl
> Subject: Re: Anonymous cash via blinded authentication
>
>
> Wei Dai wrote:
> > I'll try to stop answering my own posts, but apparently
> David Wagner did
> > propose a blind MAC scheme (see
> > http://x9.dejanews.com/getdoc.xp?AN=145097228) based on
> Diffie-Hellman.
> > This also answers the original Anonymous request for a
> blind variant of
> > something not covered by patents. The Diffie-Hellman patent
> has expired,
> > but I don't know if blind DH is covered by a patent or not.
>
> Very interesting. This can be thought of as a blinded
> version of Chaum's
> undeniable signature. The resulting "signature" cannot be verified by
> third parties. The signer can verify it, which makes it
> suitable for use
> as a coin. The undeniable signature protocol shows how the signer can
> prove to a third party that the signature is valid or invalid.
IMHO, it doesn't matter who can verify a signature for it to be a signature.
See Chaum's undeniable signatures. If there is any party at all that can
verify the signature, even if verification is limited to the signer, the
signature is still a signature.
Not trying to be a lawyer here (which I am not and would be off-topic for
this list).
--Lucky
The following archive was created by hippie-mail 7.98617-22 on Sat Apr 10 1999 - 01:18:50