[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: The Crisis with Remailers
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
In article <adc3e4280c021004b7c4@[206.170.115.3]>,
Lance Cottrell <[email protected]> wrote:
>At 9:00 AM 5/18/96, Dr. Dimitri Vulis wrote:
>>"Vladimir Z. Nuri" <[email protected]> writes:
>>> 1. there is no economic incentive.
>>
>>So, add the code to mixmaster (and even the old style remailers) to
>>collect e-cash as it passes on the anonymous message. Then this will
>>be a good way to accumulate some e-cash, and a number of people will
>>try running remailers for this very purpose. Witness the recent
>>Usenet spam by someone advertizing a for-pay remailer.
>>
>
>I was invited to the digicash API design meeting precisely to make sure it
>could be used in remailers. It will not be using the current API. The
>problem is that Mixmaster requires exact knowledge of the size of every
>object in the message, to maintain constant message size. I could set aside
>room for one, two, three coins, but there is no guarantee that the payment
>will be made with only that many coins. The current API is going to be high
>level. It will does not allow the program to know anything about the
>internals of the payment. I need to be able to specify payment of amount X
>using no more than N coins. As soon as I have that level of control, you
>will see postage in Mixmaster.
>
> -Lance
I mentioned this to Chaum, and he didn't really seem agree with the need for
something lower-level...
Another problem with postage in Mixmaster: the minimum ecash payment is
$0.01. Do we want to charge that much for email? Need we consider
micropayments?
- Ian
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: 2.6.2
iQCVAwUBMaCeeUZRiTErSPb1AQE4AgP+NvB6MjqSeF74NEeakj+u+99oZwBcFHuP
ESwbu/QiRiiolU8beC341p0HL40KHdCyfx7rfQUDOIAXzGnLaoBCjVSw/DotAlAD
UuB6NI9TXhv7j5dIywOdyYAp6SU10IKDLEuA6lkQ+jg71fXteoFF0o2nTpGaPcaU
Zqv9/UZmglI=
=1Ffr
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----