typo
This commit is contained in:
parent
838438e95d
commit
14cf795955
@ -337,7 +337,7 @@ key reasons for DigiCash's failure include:
|
||||
\item % In addition to the risk of legal disputes wh fraudulent
|
||||
% merchants and customers,
|
||||
Chaum's published design does not clearly
|
||||
limit the financial damage a exchange might suffer from the
|
||||
limit the financial damage an exchange might suffer from the
|
||||
disclosure of its private online signing key.
|
||||
\item Chaum did not support fractional payments or refunds without
|
||||
weakening customer anonymity.
|
||||
|
@ -54,11 +54,16 @@ anonymous payment systems. Thus, the efficiency of Taler is unclear.
|
||||
Additional Comment: The description of the protocols of Taler omits many
|
||||
details. In particular, the authors should describe in detail how the refunds
|
||||
are executed using the refresh protocol, as the authors claim that the refresh
|
||||
protocol allows refunds as a contribution. Furthermore, the authors should
|
||||
interpret the notation FDHK, and cite the reference for EdDSA. The title of
|
||||
Subsection 3.1 may be misleading, as this subsection does not describe the
|
||||
security model. The authors should rename the title. The “We have computed Li…”
|
||||
in Subsection 4.3 should be L(i).
|
||||
protocol allows refunds as a contribution.
|
||||
|
||||
> We added more material on refunds
|
||||
|
||||
Furthermore, the authors should interpret the notation FDHK, and cite the
|
||||
reference for EdDSA. The title of Subsection 3.1 may be misleading, as this
|
||||
subsection does not describe the security model. The authors should rename the
|
||||
title. The “We have computed Li…” in Subsection 4.3 should be L(i).
|
||||
|
||||
> FIXME: can/should we address this?
|
||||
|
||||
|
||||
----------------------- REVIEW 2 ---------------------
|
||||
|
Loading…
Reference in New Issue
Block a user