[42615] in Cypherpunks
Re: ecash remailer
daemon@ATHENA.MIT.EDU (Don M. Kitchen)
Tue Oct 31 19:57:05 1995
Date: Fri, 4 Aug 1995 19:19:00 -0600 (MDT)
From: "Don M. Kitchen" <don@cs.byu.edu>
Reply-To: "Don M. Kitchen" <don@cs.byu.edu>
To: Cypherpunks Mailing List <cypherpunks@toad.com>
In-Reply-To: <199510311940.OAA31415@opine.cs.umass.edu>
> > perpetrator, let's see... it's Ed. Ed is now charged with theft and
> > has an expensive and uncertain legal experience ahead of him.
>
> Alice-frames-Ed situation is functionally equivalent to the Bob-robs-Charlie
> situation from the bank's perspective.
I suppose the word "receipt" might be handy to introduce into the entire
scheme. A dispute over who payed & who stole is solved with paperwork of some
sort. Although a digital signature is not necessarily valid (I don't even know
what the Utah Digital Signature Law does) but the bank, as rule-setter
is allowed to say that a digital receipt DOES bind the parties in some
way.
Don
