Re: Is Anonymous E-Cash Dead? (It Never Existed)

From: John Marrek (johnmarrek@yahoo.com)
Date: Sun Jul 16 2000 - 21:14:45 MDT


The systems described here are NOT anonymous; a truly
anonymous transaction requires untraceability for both
parties. Depositing the money (or digicash, or
whatever) reveals that you have received funds, and
also makes it theoretically possible for the
transaction to be traced by the amount and the time of
the transaction. Also, of course, there is the
possibility (if not probability) of hidden information
in the instrument itself.

CASH is the only truly anonymous and widely-accepted
instrument of negotiation--and then only until it hits
a bank.

Sorry.

Marrek

Evidence to the contrary invited.

---
On 16 Jul 2000, at 22:50, Dan Fabulich wrote:
> Anonymous e-cash is, indeed, dead... but I have hope
that it will be
> reborn.
> 
> The most potent e-cash system was invented by David
Chaum.  It died
> when he decided that his anonymous e-cash program
would be the ticket
> to making him rich.  (Of course, those who
understand e-cash realize
> that it's not a way to get rich; it's a way to
provide unmatched
> benefits to consumers.  But I digress.)  He patented
blind signatures,
> the process of writing your signature on something
you can't read.
> This allowed entities who functioned as "banks" to
sign money orders
> without reading the order.  That way, you could
later present the bank
> with a signed money order, and the bank would have
no way of telling
> from whom you got the money.  You could easily send
the money orders
> via e-mail.  He also patented a mechanism to prevent
people from
> trying to reuse money orders they've already spent. 
He then signed up
> with one tiny bank in Louisiana, and, with all the
naivete you might
> expect from a man who spends lots of time thinking
about encryption
> protocols, started his proprietary Digicash system,
expecting the
> world to beat a path to his door.
> 
> To his surprise, they didn't.  Oddly enough, people
didn't want to buy
> and trade currency that they could only use at one
bank, and which
> almost no merchants would accept.  Nor would
merchants accept the
> currency when they had to pay Digicash money and
retool their
> already-working credit card payment systems in order
to accept it.
> 
> Anyway, Chaum's patent will run out in a few years. 
At that time,
> expect to see a free version of Chaum's Digicash
system proliferating;
> one that anybody can download and use.  You can even
be your own
> "bank" (in the Digicash sense) simply by proving
that you have some
> money and publicly signing an agreement to transfer
that money to
> anyone presenting you with a valid coin.
> 
> An interesting point to note is that e-cash does NOT
have to die
> simply because governments pass laws saying that
overseas transfers of
> money may not be anonymous.  If Alice in America
wants to send money
> to Bob in Britain anonymously, she can use something
analogous to a
> cypherpunk remailer system.  Alice sends e-cash to
her "bank" in
> America, along with instructions to send that e-cash
onwards to Bob's
> (pseudonymous, if neccesary) address in Britain. 
That American bank
> knows the identity of a bank in Britain, and legally
sends the money
> to the British bank, along with Alice's instructions
to send e-cash to
> Bob's address.  The British bank receives the e-cash
and sends e-cash
> to Bob.
> 
> Of course, governments *could* make this system
illegal by saying that
> NO transfers of money may be anonymous, overseas or
not.  Of course,
> they'd never do that, right?
> 
> -Dan
> 
>       -unless you love someone-
>     -nothing else makes any sense-
>            e.e. cummings
> 
__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Get Yahoo! Mail – Free email you can access from anywhere!
http://mail.yahoo.com/


This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.5 : Fri Nov 01 2002 - 15:29:59 MST