[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: Spamming
On Mon, 26 Aug 1996 13:26:04 -0500, John Deters wrote:
>>What do cypherpunks think about the following practice or law (I realize
>>that it may be impossible to implement): each email message should carry
>>a little digicash check for, say, 20 cents. Mail reading programs should
>>reject (send back unread) all messages not carrying these digital
>>checks, unless the senders are in the "friends list". The MUAs should
>>ask users whether they want to "cash" the digital check or not.
>
>I do not believe it is possible to have a secure executable that exists on
>an uncontrolled user's machine. "Tamperproof" encryption chips still
>require communications in and out from the user's program. A determined
>attacker could continue to use the pieces of their code that talk to the
>encryption chip.
>Never underestimate the allure of "free money" when you're planning to >give
>it away.
Methinks you don't understand e-cash. It's not executable, and uses public key
crypto to prevent "minting". It uses records to prevent replays. In other
words, it'd be like Ed McMahon including a quarter in the envelope. You'd only
be able to use it once....
/ If you think education is expensive, try ignorance.
/ Home: Chris Adams <[email protected]> | http://www.io-online.com/adamsc/adamsc.htp
/ Autoresponder: send email w/subject of "send resume" or "send PGPKEY"
/ Work: [email protected] | V.M. (619)515-4894 | (619)689-6579
/ Member in good standing of the GNU whirled hors d'oeuvre