address FIXMEs

This commit is contained in:
Christian Grothoff 2016-11-09 16:37:09 +01:00
parent 779af05be9
commit 44ddaaca7f
No known key found for this signature in database
GPG Key ID: 939E6BE1E29FC3CC

View File

@ -247,13 +247,11 @@ disintermediated transactions.
%\subsection{Chaum-style electronic cash}
% FIXME: what limitations? substantiate!
Chaum~\cite{chaum1983blind} proposed a digital payment system that
would provide some customer anonymity while disclosing the identity of
the merchants. DigiCash, a commercial implementation of Chaum's
proposal, had some limitations and ultimately failed to be widely
adopted. In our assessment, key reasons for DigiCash's failure
include:
proposal ultimately failed to be widely adopted. In our assessment,
key reasons for DigiCash's failure include:
\begin{itemize}
\item The use of patents to protect the technology; a payment system
@ -322,10 +320,9 @@ search costs become linear in the total value of all transactions.
%In principle, one could correct this by adding multiple denominations,
%an open problem stated already in~\cite{Camenisch05compacte-cash}.
% NO: he cannot give change, so that does not really work!
% FIXME: Claim below needs to be substantiated!
As described, the scheme employs offline double spending protection,
which inherently makes it fragile and creates an unneccessary
deanonymization risk.
deanonymization risk (see Section~\ref{sec:offline}).
%We believe the offline protection from double
%spending could be removed, thus switching the scheme to only protection
%against online doulbe spending, like Taler.
@ -1175,7 +1172,7 @@ actually facilitates voluntary cooperation between the exchange and
criminals~\cite{sander1999escrow} and where the state could
deanonymize citizens.
\subsection{Offline Payments}
\subsection{Offline Payments} \label{sec:offline}
Chaum's original proposals for anonymous digital cash avoided the need
for online interactions with the exchange to detect double spending by