[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: More FUD from First Virtual [NOISE]
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
In article <[email protected]>,
Nathaniel Borenstein <[email protected]> wrote:
> It's fundamentally different because FV (unlike all the other systems,
> to my knowledge) is a "closed loop" financial instrument.
[ ... FV is inherently harder to crack than systems which actually
use encryption, etc. etc., NB claims ... ]
Is it just me, or does this sound like a challenge?
Personally, I'd much rather see a true e-cash system (like Digicash's)
succeed than some pay-by-cleartext-email non-anonymous system.
Maybe Sameer will create a Hack FV page :-)
Or maybe NB will offer a $1000 bug bounty to anyone who can successfully
forge a transaction in FV's system (since it's so foolproof)...
- ---
[This message has been signed by an auto-signing service. A valid signature
means only that it has been received at the address corresponding to the
signature and forwarded.]
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: 2.6.2
Comment: Gratis auto-signing service
iQBFAwUBMMytkyoZzwIn1bdtAQEY+AF/bGZOi37IlT0LTWz8zhMFM4JqZ2iSchrm
Z3abBPc1MZxxDuG06NT3FCft9+eM13Fb
=yXp4
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----