From 57fef70492e9d6c0a88d025e8a716ab1db9ad202 Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001 From: Christian Grothoff Date: Thu, 18 May 2017 15:05:28 +0200 Subject: [PATCH] inline FC reviews/responses in main paper --- doc/paper/taler.tex | 13 ++++++++++++- doc/paper/taler_FC2017.txt | 2 +- 2 files changed, 13 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-) diff --git a/doc/paper/taler.tex b/doc/paper/taler.tex index 5e8f03921..ccdc54444 100644 --- a/doc/paper/taler.tex +++ b/doc/paper/taler.tex @@ -58,7 +58,8 @@ \usetikzlibrary{calc} \usepackage{eurosym} \usepackage[T1]{fontenc} - +\usepackage{verbatim} +\usepackage[utf8]{inputenc} % Copyright %\setcopyright{none} @@ -1868,6 +1869,16 @@ data being persisted are represented in between $\langle\rangle$. \item[$\overline{C^{(i)}_p}$]{Public coin keys computed from $\overline{c_s^{(i)}}$ by the verifier} \end{description} +\newpage +\onecolumn +\section{Supplemental: Reviews and Responses from Financial Cryptography} + +\subsection{FC 2016} +\verbatiminput{taler_FC2016.txt} + +\subsection{FC 2017} +\verbatiminput{taler_FC2017.txt} + \end{document} diff --git a/doc/paper/taler_FC2017.txt b/doc/paper/taler_FC2017.txt index de1c64a30..66f8560ad 100644 --- a/doc/paper/taler_FC2017.txt +++ b/doc/paper/taler_FC2017.txt @@ -21,7 +21,7 @@ be insecure. > We added a section with proofs I find two (possible) attacks against the refresh protocol. As the -exchange does not check the validity of the public key Cp′ , the attacker can +exchange does not check the validity of the public key Cp', the attacker can send an arbitrary public key to the exchange that will accept, and obtain a fresh coin. The attacker can spend partially a coin multiple times via refreshing the coin and obtaining a fresh coin in turn, as the refresh protocol