improve abstract/intro
This commit is contained in:
parent
1c7aeaf3b7
commit
0cf49c93b8
@ -101,29 +101,27 @@ Marcello Stanisci}
|
|||||||
\begin{abstract}
|
\begin{abstract}
|
||||||
GNU Taler is a new electronic online payment system which provides
|
GNU Taler is a new electronic online payment system which provides
|
||||||
privacy for customers and accountability for merchants. It uses an
|
privacy for customers and accountability for merchants. It uses an
|
||||||
exchange service to issue digital coins, and is thus not subject to
|
exchange service to issue digital coins using blind signatures,
|
||||||
the performance issues that plague Byzantine fault-tolerant
|
and is thus not subject to the performance issues that plague
|
||||||
consensus-based solutions.
|
Byzantine fault-tolerant consensus-based solutions.
|
||||||
|
|
||||||
We first describe the interaction processes of various existing online
|
The focus of this paper is addressing the challenges payment systems
|
||||||
payment systems, and analytically compare the processes involved for
|
face in the context of the Web. We discuss how to address
|
||||||
both customers and merchants. The focus here is in particular on how
|
Web-specific challenges, such as handling bookmarks and sharing of
|
||||||
to make electronic payments work nicely with the current Web
|
links, as well as supporting users that have disabled JavaScript. Web
|
||||||
architecture.
|
payment systems must also navigate various constraints imposed by
|
||||||
|
modern Web browser security architecture, such as same-origin policies
|
||||||
|
and the separation between browser extensions and Web pages. While
|
||||||
|
our analysis focuses on how Taler operates within the security
|
||||||
|
infrastructure provided by the modern Web, the results partially
|
||||||
|
generalize to other payment systems.
|
||||||
|
|
||||||
We then focus on the key advantages the Taler payment system offers,
|
We also include the perspective of merchants, as existing systems have
|
||||||
in particular in the context of Web payments. Web payment systems
|
often struggled with securing payment information at the merchant's
|
||||||
must face the reality of constraints imposed by modern Web browser
|
side. Here, challenges include avoiding database transactions for
|
||||||
security architecture, so the analysis includes considerations of how
|
customers that do not actually go through with the purchase, as well
|
||||||
Taler exploits the security infrastructure provided by the modern Web.
|
as cleanly separating security-critical functions of the payment
|
||||||
Here, we include in particular the perspective of merchants, as
|
system from the rest of the Web service.
|
||||||
existing systems have often struggled with securing payment information
|
|
||||||
at the merchant's side.
|
|
||||||
|
|
||||||
Finally, we discuss possible failure modes, highlighting how the
|
|
||||||
various payments systems can fail in practice. We argue that the
|
|
||||||
Taler payment system offers a good combination of accountability,
|
|
||||||
privacy, security and usability.
|
|
||||||
\end{abstract}
|
\end{abstract}
|
||||||
|
|
||||||
\section{Introduction}
|
\section{Introduction}
|
||||||
@ -158,7 +156,7 @@ The focus of this paper is GNU Taler, a new free software payment
|
|||||||
system designed to meet certain key ethical considerations from a
|
system designed to meet certain key ethical considerations from a
|
||||||
social liberalism perspective. In Taler, the paying customer remains
|
social liberalism perspective. In Taler, the paying customer remains
|
||||||
anonymous while the merchant is easily identified and thus taxable.
|
anonymous while the merchant is easily identified and thus taxable.
|
||||||
Here, anonymous simply means that the payment system does not require
|
Here, {\em anonymous} simply means that the payment process does not require
|
||||||
any personal information from the customer, and that different
|
any personal information from the customer, and that different
|
||||||
transactions by the same customer are unlinkable. Naturally, the
|
transactions by the same customer are unlinkable. Naturally, the
|
||||||
specifics of the transaction---such as delivery of goods to a shipping
|
specifics of the transaction---such as delivery of goods to a shipping
|
||||||
@ -172,15 +170,22 @@ digital coins, and a new {\em refresh} protocol~\cite{talercrypto} to
|
|||||||
allow giving change and refunds while maintaining unlinkability.
|
allow giving change and refunds while maintaining unlinkability.
|
||||||
|
|
||||||
This paper will not consider the details of Taler's cryptographic
|
This paper will not consider the details of Taler's cryptographic
|
||||||
protocols\footnote{Details of the protocol are documented at
|
protocols.\footnote{Details of the protocol are documented at
|
||||||
\url{https://api.taler.net/}} % But not the crypto details
|
\url{https://api.taler.net/}} The basic cryptography behind
|
||||||
and instead focuses on how a modern payment system using
|
blind-signature based payment systems has been known for over 25
|
||||||
blind signatures could practically be integrated with the modern Web.
|
years~\cite{chaum1990untraceable}. However, only in 2015 the W3c
|
||||||
This includes the challenge of hiding the cryptography from the users.
|
started the payments working group~\cite{pigs} to explore requirements
|
||||||
We also illustrate how existing {\em mental models} users have from
|
for deploying payment systems that are more secure and easy to use for
|
||||||
existing widespread payment systems apply naturally to Taler.
|
the Web. Our work describes how a modern payment system using blind
|
||||||
|
signatures could practically be integrated with the modern Web to
|
||||||
|
improve usability, security and privacy. This includes the challenge
|
||||||
|
of hiding the cryptography from the users, integrating with modern
|
||||||
|
browsers, integrating with Web shops, providing proper cryptographic
|
||||||
|
proofs for all operations, and handling network failures. We explain
|
||||||
|
our design using terms from existing {\em mental models} users have
|
||||||
|
from widespread payment systems.
|
||||||
|
|
||||||
\newpage
|
%\newpage
|
||||||
Key contributions of this paper are:
|
Key contributions of this paper are:
|
||||||
\begin{itemize}
|
\begin{itemize}
|
||||||
\item A description of different payment systems using
|
\item A description of different payment systems using
|
||||||
@ -194,7 +199,7 @@ Key contributions of this paper are:
|
|||||||
Web payments and the intricacies of securing payments
|
Web payments and the intricacies of securing payments
|
||||||
within the constraints of modern browsers.
|
within the constraints of modern browsers.
|
||||||
\item A publicly available free software
|
\item A publicly available free software
|
||||||
reference implementation of the proposed architecture.
|
reference implementation of the presented architecture.
|
||||||
\end{itemize}
|
\end{itemize}
|
||||||
|
|
||||||
|
|
||||||
@ -246,7 +251,7 @@ to the amount of cash that they carry or accept at a given
|
|||||||
time~\cite{Bankrate}. Additionally, customers are advised to choose
|
time~\cite{Bankrate}. Additionally, customers are advised to choose
|
||||||
the ATMs they use carefully, as malicious ATMs may attempt to {\em
|
the ATMs they use carefully, as malicious ATMs may attempt to {\em
|
||||||
steal} their customer's credentials. Authentication with an ATM can
|
steal} their customer's credentials. Authentication with an ATM can
|
||||||
involve a special ATM card, or, more commonly, the use of credit or
|
involve a special ATM card, or the use of credit or
|
||||||
debit cards. In all these cases, these physical security tokens are
|
debit cards. In all these cases, these physical security tokens are
|
||||||
issued by the customer's bank.
|
issued by the customer's bank.
|
||||||
|
|
||||||
@ -306,7 +311,7 @@ line for liabilities, there are still risks customers incur from the
|
|||||||
card dispute procedures, such as neither them nor the payment
|
card dispute procedures, such as neither them nor the payment
|
||||||
processor noticing fraudulent transactions, or them noticing
|
processor noticing fraudulent transactions, or them noticing
|
||||||
fraudulent transactions past the {\em deadline} until which their bank
|
fraudulent transactions past the {\em deadline} until which their bank
|
||||||
would refund them. The customer also typically only has a
|
would reimburse them. The customer also typically only has a
|
||||||
merchant-generated comment and the amount paid in his credit card
|
merchant-generated comment and the amount paid in his credit card
|
||||||
statement as a proof for the transaction. Thus, the use of credit
|
statement as a proof for the transaction. Thus, the use of credit
|
||||||
cards online does not generate any cryptographically {\em verifiable}
|
cards online does not generate any cryptographically {\em verifiable}
|
||||||
|
Loading…
Reference in New Issue
Block a user