From bounce-ecm@ai.mit.edu Tue Oct 3 01:55:58 1995 Return-Path: Received: by life.ai.mit.edu (4.1/AI-4.10) for /com/mailer/majordomo-wrapper archive2.pl -a -m -f /com/archive/ecm/ecm.archive id AA27966; Tue, 3 Oct 95 01:55:58 EDT Received: from nagina.cs.colorado.edu by life.ai.mit.edu (4.1/AI-4.10) for /com/mailer/majordomo-wrapper resend -l ecm -h ai.mit.edu -s -r ecm ecm-outgoing id AA27959; Tue, 3 Oct 95 01:55:52 EDT Received: from nagina.cs.colorado.edu (localhost.cs.colorado.edu [127.0.0.1]) by nagina.cs.colorado.edu (8.6.10/8.6.10) with ESMTP id XAA03147 for ; Mon, 2 Oct 1995 23:55:52 -0600 Message-Id: <199510030555.XAA03147@nagina.cs.colorado.edu> To: ecm@ai.mit.edu Subject: Selling Ecash Date: Mon, 02 Oct 1995 23:55:52 -0600 From: Bryce Wilcox Sender: bounce-ecm@ai.mit.edu Precedence: bulk Reply-To: Bryce Wilcox -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- I'm willing to sell some Ecash. Last time I checked the market was sluggish, and I'm hoping that this was due to a dearth of sellers. :-) The price is negotiable. We can always toss other things into the bargaining bin, like computer hardware (I have a 2400 baud modem), Magic: the Gathering cards (I have a Diamond Valley), and bryce@colorado.edu -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: 2.6.2 Comment: Automatic PGP clearsigning under Unix with Bryce's Auto-PGP v1.0 iQCVAwUBMHDQPfWZSllhfG25AQFWMQP9EZC969fHuYRgI/xlr2S8cSEbWigHID5Q FMoe26FegBeixHiFVutErLMxTE8O9qHbUDVJqFL5aiZcO52Ng9g4Lj+9Y7bSbMRZ YxE97G7OWd7admut7DZWAL1j36wyxxQE7rPOfOI94/6oXrfQ99PvXLJwXblqlhl2 ErMnghJPYII= =ZXIA -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- From bounce-ecm@ai.mit.edu Tue Oct 3 08:48:28 1995 Return-Path: Received: by life.ai.mit.edu (4.1/AI-4.10) for /com/mailer/majordomo-wrapper archive2.pl -a -m -f /com/archive/ecm/ecm.archive id AA09644; Tue, 3 Oct 95 08:48:28 EDT Received: from infinity.c2.org by life.ai.mit.edu (4.1/AI-4.10) for /com/mailer/majordomo-wrapper resend -l ecm -h ai.mit.edu -s -r ecm ecm-outgoing id AA09633; Tue, 3 Oct 95 08:48:20 EDT Received: (from apache@localhost) by infinity.c2.org (8.6.12/8.6.9) id FAA20603; Tue, 3 Oct 1995 05:43:18 -0700 Community ConneXion: Privacy & Community: Date: Tue, 3 Oct 1995 05:43:18 -0700 Message-Id: <199510031243.FAA20603@infinity.c2.org> To: ecm@ai.mit.edu Cc: ecash-market@unicorn.com From: ecash-market@unicorn.com Subject: New buy offer Sender: bounce-ecm@ai.mit.edu Precedence: bulk Reply-To: ecash-market@unicorn.com E=500 RATE(per c$100)=SGD$10 BUY-OFFER 1995-09-03 05:43 5 EUID=http://www.c2.org/~mark/ecash/ecash.html From bounce-ecm@ai.mit.edu Sat Oct 7 13:27:45 1995 Return-Path: Received: by life.ai.mit.edu (4.1/AI-4.10) for /com/mailer/majordomo-wrapper archive2.pl -a -m -f /com/archive/ecm/ecm.archive id AA12694; Sat, 7 Oct 95 13:27:45 EDT Received: from hermes (hermes.ex.ac.uk) by life.ai.mit.edu (4.1/AI-4.10) for /com/mailer/majordomo-wrapper resend -l ecm -h ai.mit.edu -s -r ecm ecm-outgoing id AA12687; Sat, 7 Oct 95 13:27:40 EDT Received: from atlas.dcs.exeter.ac.uk by hermes via SMTP (SAA02856); Sat, 7 Oct 1995 18:27:28 +0100 From: aba@atlas.ex.ac.uk Received: from exe.dcs.exeter.ac.uk by atlas.dcs.exeter.ac.uk; Sat, 7 Oct 95 18:27:27 BST Date: Sat, 7 Oct 95 18:27:29 +0100 Message-Id: <15811.9510071727@exe.dcs.exeter.ac.uk> To: cypherpunks@toad.com, ecm@ai.mit.edu Cc: aba@atlas.ex.ac.uk Subject: cypherpunks digicash bank? Sender: bounce-ecm@ai.mit.edu Precedence: bulk Reply-To: aba@atlas.ex.ac.uk -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Re the attempts to get a practical DigiCash system moving with the unofficial exchanges at the two exchanges: http://www.c2.org/~mark/ecash/ecash.html http://www.firecloud.com/eshop/eshop.htm plus people participating on the ecm mailing list http://www.ai.mit.edu/people/lethin/ecm/ one of the major problems which crops up in discussion is that there is no guaranteed future for the current issue of Digicash, ie it relies on the digicash trial, and DigiCash's continuation in running this server. ... One solution would be for some one, a group of cypherpunks, or individual cypherpunk, a startup company, to actually license the technology from Chaum. It has always puzzled me as to why Chaum hadn't taken this approach himself. - From what I've read in previous discussions, the price is $150k, plus 10% of profits. Other than that what is required is presumably a dealership in the major credit cards (VISA/mastercard, etc), a secure WWW server (to allow on-line purchase of c$), or simply PGP signed, encrypted emailed purchase instructions, and a good internet connection. Also some legal consultations to check if setting up such a system - payee anonymous, would be ok in the US. Or perhaps another jurisdiction if this was a sticking point. Work out anonymous gateways to things like MSN electronic cheques later :-) It strikes me that none of these things are insurmountable, and that the resulting system could become very popular, as well as furthering the cypherpunks cause - in the sense of having good cryptographic system in place, which would hopefully attain wide use. All that would be needed would be the internet connect (which some folks have already?), VISA/mastercard (same folks might have already?) $200k ($50k to honour existing digicash currency, at 5c$ to 100 US$ + $150k for license), a well secured host, and lots of work. Start small, that's my moto, no need to go investing more than that until the things started, and bringing money. As, and if, it brings in money, use that to buy better net connect, server hardware, etc. I'd have thought the way to do it would be for the bank to link the currency directly to a physical currency, US$ say, and to keep the interest on the c$ currency in circulation, as profits. Maybe not the way to make the most money, but then that's the advantage the civilian sector has over big banks :-) 100% real-currency backed, so that it would be impossible to have a run on the bank. Also a nice way to run it, as there are no apparent charges for using the cash, or licensing clients (aka you hand out clients willy nilly for free, like the netscape model which seems to work so well). I'm serious, and would want to invest in it. So what say? 1st digicash bank, *run*, and owned by a group of cypherpunks? Adam - -- #!/bin/perl -s-- -export-a-crypto-system-sig -RSA-3-lines-PERL $m=unpack(H.$w,$m."\0"x$w),$_=`echo "16do$w 2+4Oi0$d*-^1[d2%Sa 2/d0 Received: by life.ai.mit.edu (4.1/AI-4.10) for /com/mailer/majordomo-wrapper archive2.pl -a -m -f /com/archive/ecm/ecm.archive id AA26013; Sun, 8 Oct 95 12:59:55 EDT Received: from zork.tiac.net by life.ai.mit.edu (4.1/AI-4.10) for /com/mailer/majordomo-wrapper resend -l ecm -h ai.mit.edu -s -r ecm ecm-outgoing id AA26006; Sun, 8 Oct 95 12:59:51 EDT Received: from [199.0.65.105] (FlyingCloud.tiac.net [199.0.65.105]) by zork.tiac.net (8.6.9/8.6.6.Beta9) with SMTP id NAA24612; Sun, 8 Oct 1995 13:00:00 -0400 X-Sender: rah@tiac.net Message-Id: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Date: Sun, 8 Oct 1995 12:59:53 -0400 To: www-buyinfo@allegra.att.com, ecm@ai.mit.edu From: rah@shipwright.com (Robert Hettinga) Subject: (cpx) Re: cypherpunks digicash bank? Sender: bounce-ecm@ai.mit.edu Precedence: bulk Reply-To: rah@shipwright.com (Robert Hettinga) --- begin forwarded text X-Sender: cman@mail.communities.com Mime-Version: 1.0 Date: Sat, 7 Oct 1995 22:23:40 -0800 To: cypherpunks@toad.com From: cman@communities.com (Douglas Barnes) Subject: Re: cypherpunks digicash bank? Sender: owner-cypherpunks@toad.com Precedence: bulk Status: U I strongly recommend that anyone considering licensing from Chaum first read my paper on some interesting aspects of his basic blinding patent. The paper is at: http://www.communities.com/paper/agnostic.html. I will be putting up another short paper on anonymous currency management within the next few days. Also, I strongly recommend that anyone serious about this not use the word "bank", and take the time to figure out how to structure the service as an NBFI (non-banking financial institution) and not a "bank". Note that NBFIs are still regulated, and you will, at minimum, need to consult with your state banking regulators as well as the IRS (who also regulate money transmitters, i.e. issuers of traveller's checks, moneygrams, etc.) Note that the BSA (Bank _non_ Secrecy Act) does in fact apply to NBFIs and money transmitters, and you should be sure to educate yourself as to the implications of this. I will be covering some aspects of these issues at length in my trip report on the anti-money-laundering conference I recently attended, which was a real eye-opener in a number of ways. --- end forwarded text ----------------- Robert Hettinga (rah@shipwright.com) Shipwright Development Corporation, 44 Farquhar Street, Boston, MA 02131 USA (617) 323-7923 "Reality is not optional." --Thomas Sowell >>>>Phree Phil: Email: zldf@clark.net http://www.netresponse.com/zldf <<<<< From bounce-ecm@ai.mit.edu Sun Oct 8 12:59:59 1995 Return-Path: Received: by life.ai.mit.edu (4.1/AI-4.10) for /com/mailer/majordomo-wrapper archive2.pl -a -m -f /com/archive/ecm/ecm.archive id AA26021; Sun, 8 Oct 95 12:59:59 EDT Received: from zork.tiac.net by life.ai.mit.edu (4.1/AI-4.10) for /com/mailer/majordomo-wrapper resend -l ecm -h ai.mit.edu -s -r ecm ecm-outgoing id AA26014; Sun, 8 Oct 95 12:59:56 EDT Received: from [199.0.65.105] (FlyingCloud.tiac.net [199.0.65.105]) by zork.tiac.net (8.6.9/8.6.6.Beta9) with SMTP id NAA24623; Sun, 8 Oct 1995 13:00:06 -0400 X-Sender: rah@tiac.net Message-Id: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Date: Sun, 8 Oct 1995 12:59:59 -0400 To: www-buyinfo@allegra.att.com, ecm@ai.mit.edu From: rah@shipwright.com (Robert Hettinga) Subject: (cpx) Re: cypherpunks digicash bank? Sender: bounce-ecm@ai.mit.edu Precedence: bulk Reply-To: rah@shipwright.com (Robert Hettinga) --- begin forwarded text X-Sender: cman@mail.communities.com Mime-Version: 1.0 Date: Sun, 8 Oct 1995 08:42:37 -0800 To: aba@atlas.ex.ac.uk From: cman@communities.com (Douglas Barnes) Subject: Re: cypherpunks digicash bank? Cc: cypherpunks@toad.com Sender: owner-cypherpunks@toad.com Precedence: bulk Adam -- I'm afraid you may have somewhat misunderstood the motivation behind the Identity Agnostic paper. In no way is it intended as a way of not facing the music wrt regulators in the country(s) where such an institution has offices. The IA approach is intended as an possible alternative for an institution that might otherwise license from Chaum. The regulators I've discussed this with are primarily concerned with how money moves into and out of a digital cash system. The fact that small payments cannot be traced from buyer to seller is not at the top of their list of concerns -- it's already a basic fact of life for them in existing payment systems. They are also not oblivious to the privacy concerns inherent in an institution logging masssive amounts of counterparty data about small transactions. I would strongly discourage anyone from trying to set up a garage- type operation. While regulators clearly don't appreciate the subtleties of this stuff, they can spot an illegal bank or an unlicensed money transmitter from a mile away. If your concern is creating account anonymity, then you're going to need to set up outside of the US. Do be aware that even the more relaxed countries of the world have regulations that cover this sort of thing, and they are especially interested in making sure you at least pay the appropriate licensing fees. --- end forwarded text ----------------- Robert Hettinga (rah@shipwright.com) Shipwright Development Corporation, 44 Farquhar Street, Boston, MA 02131 USA (617) 323-7923 "Reality is not optional." --Thomas Sowell >>>>Phree Phil: Email: zldf@clark.net http://www.netresponse.com/zldf <<<<< From bounce-ecm@ai.mit.edu Sun Oct 8 13:01:34 1995 Return-Path: Received: by life.ai.mit.edu (4.1/AI-4.10) for /com/mailer/majordomo-wrapper archive2.pl -a -m -f /com/archive/ecm/ecm.archive id AA26407; Sun, 8 Oct 95 13:01:34 EDT Received: from zork.tiac.net by life.ai.mit.edu (4.1/AI-4.10) for /com/mailer/majordomo-wrapper resend -l ecm -h ai.mit.edu -s -r ecm ecm-outgoing id AA26072; Sun, 8 Oct 95 13:01:14 EDT Received: from [199.0.65.105] (FlyingCloud.tiac.net [199.0.65.105]) by zork.tiac.net (8.6.9/8.6.6.Beta9) with SMTP id NAA24718 for ; Sun, 8 Oct 1995 13:01:12 -0400 X-Sender: rah@tiac.net Message-Id: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Date: Sun, 8 Oct 1995 13:01:05 -0400 To: ecm@ai.mit.edu From: rah@shipwright.com (Robert Hettinga) Subject: (cpx) Software Patents are Freezing Evolution of Products Sender: bounce-ecm@ai.mit.edu Precedence: bulk Reply-To: rah@shipwright.com (Robert Hettinga) --- begin forwarded text Date: Sat, 7 Oct 1995 13:15:22 -0700 X-Sender: tcmay@mail.got.net Mime-Version: 1.0 To: cypherpunks@toad.com From: tcmay@got.net (Timothy C. May) Subject: Software Patents are Freezing Evolution of Products Sender: owner-cypherpunks@toad.com Precedence: bulk Status: U INTRODUCTION I'm finally going to write down some of my evolving views on why software patents are fraught with dangers. Yes, many of you are no doubt already convinced that software patents (XOR cursor, RSA, digicash, etc.) are a Bad Idea, but I have a different angle on this which I'd like to present. SUMMARY Thesis: Software patents are a bad idea because they freeze the evolution too early and payment metering schemes are too difficult to arrange, which also helps to freeze evolution. Software patents are bad because customers cannot freely and without entanglements incorporate the ideas into their own products. The situation has become much worse with software, because there is no physical object which can be used to meter usage of a patent. HOW PATENTS WORK WITH PHYSICAL OBJECTS Before explaining this thesis, let's look at how patents work with _physical_ inventions, even if those inventions embody abstract process or software inventions. The microprocessor is a good example, which I'll use here for most of my examples. (Note that Intel did not try to patent the "basic idea" of the microprocessor; Gilbert Hyatt claims he filed before Intel produced the first 4004, but this claim and the swirl of issues around the Patent Office's granting of a patent to him are a separate topic.) A microprocessor chip incorporates numerous items that are patented, copyrighted, or that have trade secret status. Some of these patents, etc., even involve design tools used to design the chip. And some of the patents involve sophisticated production methods. And yet a customer can simply *buy* the chips and use them as he *wishes*, in hamburger cookers or in digital money schemes, without any further regard for the patents. No entanglements. You go down to Fry's Electronics, buy some Pentiums or PPCs and use them as you wish. No permissions needed from Intel or Motorola, no complex license agreements saying you won't use the chips to compete with Intel's board business or with Motorola's cellular phone business, no restrictions (save for government laws about munitions, etc.) on who you can resell the chips or systems to. That is, the whole set of patent and copyright issues is _encapsulated_ or _reified_ into the instance being sold. The physical object carries the embodiment of the patents (including the process patents used to fabricate the chip: the user of such a chip can be oblivious to these patents and need not worry that a design will infringe on these patents). [Sidenote: The astute observer will note some conceptual similarities to "on-line clearing," to a "cash-and-carry" business. Once you've paid your money and taken delivery of your 486 or your laser or your widget, how you incorporate it into future products is generally your business and yours alone. I say "generally," and legal beagles will point out that some hardware sales may have restrictions placed on what can be done with the hardware. Contracts are always possible. But for most objects, there is no such additional contract. The widget seller has made his money by the sale of his widget and cannot really try too hard to make more "downstream" money, except by modifying his future prices to reflect what he perceives demand to be.] SOFTWARE IS REPLICABLE Hardware object cannot be easily replicated, and hence patents can be reified into the objects. Software objects of course _can_ be easily replicated, which is why convoluted licensing and complex payment contracts are involved. (This is an incredibly important distinction, and one which also relates closely to why "software ICs" and "object widgets" are not built, sold, improved upon, etc. by the software industry. Ted Kaehler of Apple once told me that an H-P analyst/thinker came up with this sort of analysis of why there is no "software IC" industry to parallel the actual IC industry. He argues that there is no "learning curve" for software, in the way there is for physical objects. Sorry, I don't recall his name. If I were pursuing this essay here as an actual, researched paper, I would did up this guy's analysis. Also, Brad Cox has done a lot of work on "software ICs"--he coined the term, in fact--and his papers are worth looking at.) HOW THIS APPLIES TO THE CRYPTO COMMUNITY Contrast this with the following "software patent" situations, the ones directly relating to our crypto community: 1. The public key and RSA patents. RSADSI (and I'm ignoring for now the implications of the PKP/Cylink complication) wants to see intended applications and to work out arrangements for license payment based on profits, volume, effects on their other licensees, etc. This limits the ways in which the RSADSI patents have been incorporated into evolutionary and revolutionary products. 2. The Chaum Digicash patents. Digicash wants $150K upfront, plus 10% of profits. (Cf. Adam Back's posting on this today.) Digicash has their own particular version they are pushing, but others are effectively shut out of developing experimental applications. Imagine the situation if the garage shop developers of personal computers had been forced to pay Intel up front for the right to design in an 8008 or 8080 microprocessor, and then promise to pay 10% of their profits to Intel (and 5% to the power supply vendor, 8% to the keyboard supplier, 4% to the capacitor makers, 9% to the memory chip companies, and so on....). In both of these cases, the confusing, complicating, and almost insurmountable issue is that these conditions are very hard to meet. It's not just the issue of sharing a business plan with RSADSI or Digicash, it's the fact that many aspects of one's business are unknown: the viability, the volume, the future products, etc. The "garage shop" folks usually can't even get in the door to talk to these companies. THE REAL ISSUE: TRANSACTION COSTS ARE THWARTING EVOLUTONARY DEVELOPMENT To me, the issue of concern is not that "software ideas should not be patented." After all, why should the _idea_ of a safety pin or a windshield wiper be any more patentable than the idea for a blinded transaction? Rather, the issue of concern is that the patents on the software ideas and concepts mean that experimenters, developers, and hackers cannot buy a license for digicash the way they would buy some ICs and then experiment, develop, and hack. Another way of looking at this is that _transaction costs_ are too high and are thwarting normal evolutionary development. The guy in the garage trying to develop a "digital postage stamp," for example, can't use the Chaumian blinding protocols without hiring lawyers, paying Chaum his up-front fee, and laying out his designs and business plans (which he very probably doesn't even have!). (Clarification: I'm not saying one can't buy fairly cheap RSA versions, such as the code in RSAREF. What I'm saying is that one can't get a "core module" for digicash, for example, and then test out the market with various implementations, going into volume production with the ones that are most successful.) (And you can perhaps tell from my views here that I am not villifying either RSADSI or Digicash here for their policies: they are trying to make a reasonable profit in the face of a situation very much unlike the situation faced for physical objects like microprocessors. David Chaum points out that "there is no digital coin." Likewise, there is no "software coin," and so the developers of novel ideas cannot "reify" the ideas in things they can sell...rather, we see the current approach of convoluted and restrictive licensing contracts. They try to make up for the lack of a "software coin" by grilling potential customers about their expected markets and by setting up complicated contracts to ensure--they think--enough profits.) EVOLUTION What do I mean my "freezing" the evolution of products? Take the case of Digicash and their test release. As I pointed out in a recent essay ("Crypto + Economics + AI = Digital Money Economies"), we are _impoverished_ with regard to the basic building blocks we have for a digital money system. Where are the equivalents of what we find necessary in the existing financial world? Does anybody think that a particular instance of digital cash is the end state of the evolution of digital cash? It is likely just the beginning. But by the licensing of particular systems, and by having convoluted and restrictive arrangements for use of the patents, the evolution of digital money and crypto systems grinds to a halt. Instead of having dozens of implementations of digital cash systems (I mean real digital cash systems, embodying the Chaumian or Brandsian blinding schemes, not the cheesy "smartcard" systems that are carelessly called "digital cash), we have only a very few: a road toll system here, a play money experiment there, etc. Evolution works by _differential reproduction_ (often misleadingly called "survival of the fittest"). Several dozen variants of personal computers are introduced (Sphere, Altair, Imsai, Sol, Exidy, Pet, Apple I, Apple II, IBM PC, Macintosh, etc.), and customers reward the ones they like with increased sales, causing the "genes" (or memes) of the winning products and companies and designers to propagate. The ability to incorporate PGP into tools and objects without complicated entanglements is one reason PGP did so well. It was a "building block" that anybody could build into other tools and objects, without regard for how big the market might be for their tools, without regard to what other users were doing, etc. (I'm ignoring for the moment any claims RSADSI may have had that PGP infringed.) CONCLUSIONS Both the public key and digital cash situations are being affected by this inability of people to use the core ideas as building blocks for more complicated--or more revolutionary--systems. It's as if Intel had, in 1971, insisted that all designs be approved by them, and that chips could not be sold to competitors who had already licensed the chips, and that 10% of all profits be ceded to Intel. This would likely have had a big effect on the explosion of applications that came about in the years since the micro's introduction. Do I have a solution for RSADSI, Cylink, Digicash, and others? Given that there is no "software coin," my hunch is that no simple solution exists. To take David Chaum's case in particular, I think he'll end up making a lot more money by being the guru and consultant on digital money systems (the inventor of a field and all) than by having licensing schemes which are probably unenforceable and which are mostly slowing down the evolution of the bits and pieces needed for true digital money economies. I've had these ideas swirling in my head for a long time, and thought it was time to share them with you folks. Comments are welcome. --Tim May Views here are not the views of my Internet Service Provider or Government. ---------:---------:---------:---------:---------:---------:---------:---- Timothy C. May | Crypto Anarchy: encryption, digital money, tcmay@got.net 408-728-0152 | anonymous networks, digital pseudonyms, zero Corralitos, CA | knowledge, reputations, information markets, Higher Power: 2^756839 | black markets, collapse of governments. "National borders are just speed bumps on the information superhighway." --- end forwarded text ----------------- Robert Hettinga (rah@shipwright.com) Shipwright Development Corporation, 44 Farquhar Street, Boston, MA 02131 USA (617) 323-7923 "Reality is not optional." --Thomas Sowell >>>>Phree Phil: Email: zldf@clark.net http://www.netresponse.com/zldf <<<<< From bounce-ecm@ai.mit.edu Sun Oct 8 13:22:36 1995 Return-Path: Received: by life.ai.mit.edu (4.1/AI-4.10) for /com/mailer/majordomo-wrapper archive2.pl -a -m -f /com/archive/ecm/ecm.archive id AA27356; Sun, 8 Oct 95 13:22:36 EDT Received: from hermes (hermes.ex.ac.uk) by life.ai.mit.edu (4.1/AI-4.10) for /com/mailer/majordomo-wrapper resend -l ecm -h ai.mit.edu -s -r ecm ecm-outgoing id AA27349; Sun, 8 Oct 95 13:22:29 EDT Received: from atlas.dcs.exeter.ac.uk by hermes via SMTP (SAA21487); Sun, 8 Oct 1995 18:22:14 +0100 From: aba@atlas.ex.ac.uk Received: from exe.dcs.exeter.ac.uk by atlas.dcs.exeter.ac.uk; Sun, 8 Oct 95 18:22:12 BST Date: Sun, 8 Oct 95 18:22:15 +0100 Message-Id: <18185.9510081722@exe.dcs.exeter.ac.uk> To: cman@communities.com Cc: cypherpunks@toad.com, ecm@ai.mit.edu, aba@atlas.ex.ac.uk Subject: Re: cypherpunks digicash bank? Sender: bounce-ecm@ai.mit.edu Precedence: bulk Reply-To: aba@atlas.ex.ac.uk Douglas Barnes writes on cypherpunks: > I'm afraid you may have somewhat misunderstood the motivation behind > the Identity Agnostic paper. In no way is it intended as a way of > not facing the music wrt regulators in the country(s) where such an > institution has offices. The IA approach is intended as an possible > alternative for an institution that might otherwise license from > Chaum. So it's intended for avoiding patent issues only? But the identity agnostic idea, and the idea of using software not officially supplied by the bank does not sound like something that would be easy to convince a bank, or other financial institution of? I mean the agnostic server idea is that the user must obtain patent infringing software in order to gain anonymity, or else the user individually obtain on a case by case basis a license from Chaum. A similar mess to the early problem with PGP, back in the days when RSA contended that PGP was a patent infringement, and the other side of the story was that it was the users responsibility to get a license from RSA. As early versions of PGP demonstrated individuals can get away with this kind of thing, but it doesn't help commercial uptake of the software. You need commercial uptake, as a lot of the shops will be commercial service providers, plus value added information or product providers. What I'm saying is that whilst technically the server need do nothing infringing, without the infringing client software it provides nothing new over existing systems, and that the stigma of illegality, might adversely affect the acceptability of the whole scheme to a bank. Ie if you really wanted to sell the system to a bank, you'd presumably stand a better chance if you removed the potential for blinded signatures altogether. Tim is right, patents most definitely retard advancement of technology. > The regulators I've discussed this with are primarily concerned with > how money moves into and out of a digital cash system. The fact that > small payments cannot be traced from buyer to seller is not at the > top of their list of concerns -- it's already a basic fact of life > for them in existing payment systems. So you think with the $10k limit, they might even be happy with a system such as I just described? (note: I did not imply anonymous accounts, only payer anonymity, basically exactly what Chaum has in his trial system right now). > They are also not oblivious to the privacy concerns inherent in an > institution logging massive amounts of counterparty data about > small transactions. I had not realised they were concerned over such things. How does this fit in with the separate 100$ bill for domestic and foreign use? It was previously my suspicion, that 100$ bills were first, and that soon they would be trying to outlaw cash altogether! Perhaps I am too cynical, and I am glad to hear it. (Anyone know if anything ever come of this creation of a foreign issue of 100$ bills which had to be exchanged at customs in entry and exit, each being legal tender only when used in the correct jurisdiction?) > I would strongly discourage anyone from trying to set up a garage- > type operation. While regulators clearly don't appreciate the > subtleties of this stuff, they can spot an illegal bank or an > unlicensed money transmitter from a mile away. I was talking of doing it by the book, patent licenses, appropriate banking licenses, banking regulatory approval. Your description of the banking regulatory bodies likely stance on transferring small amounts anonymously was more favourable than I envisaged. The garage-type operation: I was having problems convincing myself that any bank could be persuaded to do it. Hence I thought, well the civilian sector would have to do it. It doesn't have to be amateurish, just has to be run by people who have an interest in privacy, cypherpunks aren't excluded from doing things professionally, and in fact have a vested interest in seeing it succeed even. You can't expect big banks, governments or corporate types to deliver privacy on a plate, it is counter to their interests - they like nicely indexed, cataloged user profiles, as they are saleable items. Accurate user demographics is big business. The closest that I've seen to a bank offering any semblance of anonymity is Mondex, and it's a crock as far as privacy goes IMO, as as far as I understand the card knows everything, and there is *nothing* stopping the bank downloading *all* of that information next time you plug the card in. That's the kind of anonymity I was growing used to seeing banks offer. Also the fact that it relies purely on the tamper resistance of the card isn't very inspiring, no cryptographic protocols, just a counter buried in a tamper proof card. > If your concern is creating account anonymity, then you're going to > need to set up outside of the US. That was not the immediate concern, only payer anonymity. I thought this would be too much to expect to get away with. Your comments backup that belief. > Do be aware that even the more relaxed countries of the world have > regulations that cover this sort of thing, and they are especially > interested in making sure you at least pay the appropriate licensing > fees. Licensing fees for what? I lack details, and insight into the background of financial dealings (as you might have noticed:-), but my outburst was prompted by impatience with the take up of DigiCash, or any half decent alternative. Blind signature technology has been around for a long time now, and there is not one on-line instance of a practical real world use of this technology. So what problems remain to be solved with a system which has the following characteristics: 1) either agnostic (to save $150k + 10% profits) or coughing up the $150k for Chaums patents - I'm not fussy, only concern for me is implications on uptake as described above 2) no anonymous accounts 3) payer anonymous 4) on-line, normal banking style records kept of money paid in 5) 100% real currency backed 6) profits by keeping interest on backed currency, possibly small % on cashing to pass on VISA costs, etc if necessary Would US banking regulations in your opinion have a problem with this? If $150k is the real sticking point then I'm surprised, I mean ok, it's some money, perhaps the 10% cut of profits Chaum requires is more of a concern. But surely this would win as a privacy preserving internet payment system for convenience, on-line instant payment. With the kind of money investors seem to be willing to back netscape with and the unexpectedly high level of interest in their commerce servers, even Chaum's $150k seems like small change. There must be more to it, what a $1M lawyers bill to sort out the technicalities, and legal implications with regulators? Adam -- #!/bin/perl -s-- -export-a-crypto-system-sig -RSA-3-lines-PERL $m=unpack(H.$w,$m."\0"x$w),$_=`echo "16do$w 2+4Oi0$d*-^1[d2%Sa 2/d0 Received: by life.ai.mit.edu (4.1/AI-4.10) for /com/mailer/majordomo-wrapper archive2.pl -a -m -f /com/archive/ecm/ecm.archive id AA29667; Sun, 8 Oct 95 14:31:09 EDT Received: from dc.digicash.com by life.ai.mit.edu (4.1/AI-4.10) for /com/mailer/majordomo-wrapper resend -l ecm -h ai.mit.edu -s -r ecm ecm-outgoing id AA29651; Sun, 8 Oct 95 14:31:04 EDT Received: from digicash.com (digicash.com [193.78.226.2]) by dc.digicash.com (8.6.11/8.6.9) with ESMTP id TAA21727 for ; Sun, 8 Oct 1995 19:31:03 +0100 Received: (from bigmac@localhost) by digicash.com (8.6.10/8.6.6) id TAA09839 for ecm@ai.mit.edu; Sun, 8 Oct 1995 19:31:09 +0100 Date: Sun, 8 Oct 1995 19:31:09 +0100 From: Marcel van der Peijl Message-Id: <199510081831.TAA09839@digicash.com> To: ecm@ai.mit.edu Subject: Chaum patent prices Sender: bounce-ecm@ai.mit.edu Precedence: bulk Reply-To: Marcel van der Peijl Hi, I just want to make a quick comment on the prices that have been floating around on this list ($150K +10%). No doubt this is what David asked at some point to some individual but it is NOT the 'list price' -- there is no such thing as a list price. It all depends on the application, business potential etc. The up-front patent price should never be an obstacle for setting up business. If you wanna do serious business, I suggest to give David Chaum a call, or call Dan Eldridge. Phone numbers and email addresses can be found on our web pages. You might be surprised. And may I remind you that the patent price that is quoted is just a tiny drop in the bucket compared to the kind of money spent on marketing budgets for systems like Mondex!!! You are really talking about a non-issue here, IMHO. Marcel van der Peijl DigiCash bv From bounce-ecm@ai.mit.edu Sun Oct 8 16:18:58 1995 Return-Path: Received: by life.ai.mit.edu (4.1/AI-4.10) for /com/mailer/majordomo-wrapper archive2.pl -a -m -f /com/archive/ecm/ecm.archive id AA04320; Sun, 8 Oct 95 16:18:58 EDT Received: from hermes (hermes.ex.ac.uk) by life.ai.mit.edu (4.1/AI-4.10) for /com/mailer/majordomo-wrapper resend -l ecm -h ai.mit.edu -s -r ecm ecm-outgoing id AA04309; Sun, 8 Oct 95 16:18:52 EDT Received: from atlas.dcs.exeter.ac.uk by hermes via SMTP (VAA24008); Sun, 8 Oct 1995 21:18:44 +0100 From: aba@atlas.ex.ac.uk Received: from exe.dcs.exeter.ac.uk by atlas.dcs.exeter.ac.uk; Sun, 8 Oct 95 21:18:42 BST Date: Sun, 8 Oct 95 21:18:44 +0100 Message-Id: <18416.9510082018@exe.dcs.exeter.ac.uk> To: cypherpunks@toad.com, ecm@ai.mit.edu Cc: cman@communities.com, tcmay@got.net, bigmac@digicash.com Subject: Re: Chaum patent prices Sender: bounce-ecm@ai.mit.edu Precedence: bulk Reply-To: aba@atlas.ex.ac.uk Tim wrote in his (to me) spot on article (cypherpunks list) about patents wrecking technolgical progress, and hindering all important experimentation, and exploration of technology: > [...] for example, can't use the Chaumian blinding protocols > without hiring lawyers, paying Chaum his up-front fee, and laying > out his designs and business plans (which he very probably doesn't > even have!). from Marcel's post: > I just want to make a quick comment on the prices that have been > floating around on this list ($150K +10%). No doubt this is what > David asked at some point to some individual but it is NOT the > 'list price' -- there is no such thing as a list price. It all ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^ > depends on the application, business potential etc. ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^ ie laying your plans out up front, plans which don't exist! Business potential is not predictable, even obtaining appropriate status, and banking licenses would presumably be doubtful unless a concerted, organised effort were put together. Requiring business plans rules out experimenting. The freeware mosaic browsers growth while being developed by academia, and the WWW in general seems to be a model which works rather well for the internet, if the netscape success story is anything to go by. Internet payment is rather harder to set up as a small experimental operation due to the legal and political implications, but a *real* example by Digicash would be nice. As in: if no licensing banks for digicash can be found, perhaps it would be a good approach for digicash to do it themselves, and support an offical exchange mechanism, if such a mechanism took off, banks might be interested to buy into an existing client base. On the $150k + 10% figures, my apologies, I picked them up from earlier posts on ecm I think, and had assumed incorrectly that this was a fixed price. > The up-front patent price should never be an obstacle for setting up > business. If you wanna do serious business, I suggest to give David > Chaum a call, or call Dan Eldridge. Phone numbers and email addresses > can be found on our web pages. You might be surprised. I am tempted to say: "how about free for a good cause :-)" And it might (theoretically) be nice as an analogue of the relationship between PGP and RSA with PGPs current free non-commercial use license from RSA, that seems to have helped RSA quite a lot. RSA are fond of quoting statistics about the world wide usage of their algorithms, one rather suspects that PGP is included and a major contributer to their figures :-) However, being realistic, I expect the answer to be no. I can understand this, but IMO it is still not a good situation from the point of view of advancing technology. My point however, is lets see a digicash payment system with a real exchange and soon! I don't care who does it so long as it gets done! > And may I remind you that the patent price that is quoted is just a > tiny drop in the bucket compared to the kind of money spent on > marketing budgets for systems like Mondex!!! You are really talking > about a non-issue here, IMHO. True enough. The 10% is likely more of a sticking point tho, but as you say this is all negotiable. But hey, I don't have a high powered business plan, I'm just a little cypherpunk be-moaning the fact that there are no digicash licensing banks which I can use to take advantage of Chaum's privacy technology, and instant on-line buying. Just think how much hassle could be saved when buying the perl rsa T-shirts even (no, I promise no more shirts arguments, I'm talking of payment!), all the foreign cheques, the hugely exhorbitant charges banks charge for writing small value foreign currency cheques, the risks (and dubious technical legality in some places) of posting paper cash in the mail, and the odd postal order which the bank would like to charge more than the face value to cash (I kid you not, I asked a few people to send different payment forms). "Click here to buy" would be infinitely better. The market is impatient, and inferiour, non-privacy preserving payment forms are in danger of soon becoming entrenched as standard internet payment methods. Digicash has or soon will have MSN money systems to compete with. Digicash now! Adam -- #!/bin/perl -s-- -export-a-crypto-system-sig -RSA-3-lines-PERL $m=unpack(H.$w,$m."\0"x$w),$_=`echo "16do$w 2+4Oi0$d*-^1[d2%Sa 2/d0 Received: by life.ai.mit.edu (4.1/AI-4.10) for /com/mailer/majordomo-wrapper archive2.pl -a -m -f /com/archive/ecm/ecm.archive id AA22287; Tue, 10 Oct 95 14:22:03 EDT Received: from infinity.c2.org by life.ai.mit.edu (4.1/AI-4.10) for /com/mailer/majordomo-wrapper resend -l ecm -h ai.mit.edu -s -r ecm ecm-outgoing id AA22278; Tue, 10 Oct 95 14:21:55 EDT Received: (from apache@localhost) by infinity.c2.org (8.6.12/8.6.9) id LAA06302; Tue, 10 Oct 1995 11:16:44 -0700 Community ConneXion: Privacy & Community: Date: Tue, 10 Oct 1995 11:16:44 -0700 Message-Id: <199510101816.LAA06302@infinity.c2.org> To: ecm@ai.mit.edu Cc: ecash-market@unicorn.com From: ecash-market@unicorn.com Subject: New buy offer Sender: bounce-ecm@ai.mit.edu Precedence: bulk Reply-To: ecash-market@unicorn.com E=200 RATE(per c$100)=SEK 50 BUY-OFFER 1995-09-10 11:16 6 EUID=http://www.c2.org/~mark/ecash/ecash.html From bounce-ecm@ai.mit.edu Sun Oct 15 11:57:59 1995 Return-Path: Received: by life.ai.mit.edu (4.1/AI-4.10) for /com/mailer/majordomo-wrapper archive2.pl -a -m -f /com/archive/ecm/ecm.archive id AA18070; Sun, 15 Oct 95 11:57:59 EDT Received: from infinity.c2.org ([140.174.185.11]) by life.ai.mit.edu (4.1/AI-4.10) for /com/mailer/majordomo-wrapper resend -l ecm -h ai.mit.edu -s -r ecm ecm-outgoing id AA18063; Sun, 15 Oct 95 11:57:53 EDT Received: (from nobody@localhost) by infinity.c2.org (8.6.12/8.6.9) id IAA05712; Sun, 15 Oct 1995 08:52:43 -0700 Community ConneXion: Privacy & Community: Date: Sun, 15 Oct 1995 08:52:43 -0700 Message-Id: <199510151552.IAA05712@infinity.c2.org> To: ecm@ai.mit.edu Cc: ecash-market@unicorn.com From: ecash-market@unicorn.com Subject: New sell offer Sender: bounce-ecm@ai.mit.edu Precedence: bulk Reply-To: ecash-market@unicorn.com E=1000 RATE(per c$100)=f10,- gulden per 100 SELL-OFFER 1995-09-15 08:52 7 EUID=http://www.c2.org/~mark/ecash/ecash.html From bounce-ecm@ai.mit.edu Sun Oct 15 12:02:11 1995 Return-Path: Received: by life.ai.mit.edu (4.1/AI-4.10) for /com/mailer/majordomo-wrapper archive2.pl -a -m -f /com/archive/ecm/ecm.archive id AA18863; Sun, 15 Oct 95 12:02:11 EDT Received: from infinity.c2.org ([140.174.185.11]) by life.ai.mit.edu (4.1/AI-4.10) for /com/mailer/majordomo-wrapper resend -l ecm -h ai.mit.edu -s -r ecm ecm-outgoing id AA18856; Sun, 15 Oct 95 12:02:06 EDT Received: (from nobody@localhost) by infinity.c2.org (8.6.12/8.6.9) id IAA05902; Sun, 15 Oct 1995 08:57:01 -0700 Community ConneXion: Privacy & Community: Date: Sun, 15 Oct 1995 08:57:01 -0700 Message-Id: <199510151557.IAA05902@infinity.c2.org> To: ecm@ai.mit.edu Cc: ecash-market@unicorn.com From: ecash-market@unicorn.com Subject: New sell offer Sender: bounce-ecm@ai.mit.edu Precedence: bulk Reply-To: ecash-market@unicorn.com E=1000 RATE(per c$100)=f10,- gulden per 100 SELL-OFFER 1995-09-15 08:57 8 EUID=http://www.c2.org/~mark/ecash/ecash.html From bounce-ecm@ai.mit.edu Sun Oct 15 12:05:24 1995 Return-Path: Received: by life.ai.mit.edu (4.1/AI-4.10) for /com/mailer/majordomo-wrapper archive2.pl -a -m -f /com/archive/ecm/ecm.archive id AA18922; Sun, 15 Oct 95 12:05:24 EDT Received: from infinity.c2.org ([140.174.185.11]) by life.ai.mit.edu (4.1/AI-4.10) for /com/mailer/majordomo-wrapper resend -l ecm -h ai.mit.edu -s -r ecm ecm-outgoing id AA18914; Sun, 15 Oct 95 12:05:19 EDT Received: (from nobody@localhost) by infinity.c2.org (8.6.12/8.6.9) id JAA06162; Sun, 15 Oct 1995 09:00:13 -0700 Community ConneXion: Privacy & Community: Date: Sun, 15 Oct 1995 09:00:13 -0700 Message-Id: <199510151600.JAA06162@infinity.c2.org> To: ecm@ai.mit.edu Cc: ecash-market@unicorn.com From: ecash-market@unicorn.com Subject: New sell offer Sender: bounce-ecm@ai.mit.edu Precedence: bulk Reply-To: ecash-market@unicorn.com E=1000 RATE(per c$100)=f10,- gulden SELL-OFFER 1995-09-15 09:00 9 EUID=http://www.c2.org/~mark/ecash/ecash.html From bounce-ecm@ai.mit.edu Tue Oct 17 22:22:57 1995 Return-Path: Received: by life.ai.mit.edu (4.1/AI-4.10) for /com/mailer/majordomo-wrapper archive2.pl -a -m -f /com/archive/ecm/ecm.archive id AA05009; Tue, 17 Oct 95 22:22:57 EDT Received: from zork.tiac.net by life.ai.mit.edu (4.1/AI-4.10) for /com/mailer/majordomo-wrapper resend -l ecm -h ai.mit.edu -s -r ecm ecm-outgoing id AA05002; Tue, 17 Oct 95 22:22:53 EDT Received: from [199.0.65.105] (FlyingCloud.tiac.net [199.0.65.105]) by zork.tiac.net (8.6.9/8.6.6.Beta9) with SMTP id WAA17396; Tue, 17 Oct 1995 22:22:48 -0400 X-Sender: rah@tiac.net Message-Id: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Date: Tue, 17 Oct 1995 22:23:03 -0400 To: bsdc@ai.mit.edu, ecm@ai.mit.edu From: rah@shipwright.com (Robert Hettinga) Subject: (cpx) [ANNOUNCEMENT] eCash reality !! Sender: bounce-ecm@ai.mit.edu Precedence: bulk Reply-To: rah@shipwright.com (Robert Hettinga) --- begin forwarded text To: cypherpunks@toad.com Subject: [ANNOUNCEMENT] eCash reality !! From: usura@berserk.com (Alex de Joode) Date: Wed, 18 Oct 95 02:10:25 +0200 Organization: Let's Go Berserk Internet! Sender: owner-cypherpunks@toad.com Precedence: bulk e-WAVE [issue 42], a dutch language electronic newsletter published by Riverland Publications, reports that DigiCash has reached agreement with a big US bank to make eCash real. DigiCash promised the 'scoop' to Newsweek, so in next monday's issue of Newsweek we will know wich bank that is. (They are also said to be talking with a Dutch or Belgian bank or financial institution). Since there has been cut a deal with the monetary powers I wonder if we get the whole anonymous ecash or a 'diluted spieces'. -AJ- For the many subscribers of the cypherpunks mailinglist that are able to read Dutch, here is the portion of e-WAVE that has the announcement. ------BEGIN QUOTE------ Tijdens de toelichting op de toepasbaarheid van Digicash's encryptie-technologie op stemmen, komt het vermaarde e-cash ter sprake. Dinnissen heeft een primeur maar mag nog niks verklappen: 'Volgende week maandag zullen wij bekend maken met welke grote Amerikaanse bank Digicash in zee gaat om e-cash tot een legitiem en valide betaalmiddel te maken.' WAT!!! E-CASH LEGAAL?! Wow, gelijk de cyberbucks natellen. En met welke bank? 'Kan ik niet zeggen.' Ook nog Nederlandse of Belgische banken? 'Er zijn ook gesprekken dichter bij huis, ja.' Kan dat eigenlijk zomaar? 'Er zijn afspraken gemaakt met monetaire instanties. De scoop is beloofd aan het Amerikaanse tijdschrift *Newsweek* dat op die maandag uitkomt.' (Shit) Spoedig meer hierover. For more information mail: erwin@wave.riv.nl ------END QUOTE------ 88888b d888b 888b 88 8P 888888 88888b 888 888b 88 88 d888b 88 88 88 88 88 88`8b 88 88 88 88 88 88 88`8b 88 88 88 ` 88 88 88 88 88 88 88 88 88 88888P 88 88 88 88 88 88 88 88 88 88 88 88 88 `8b88 88 88 d8888888b 88 `8b88 88 88 , "" 88888P `888P 88 `888 88 88 88 `8b 88 `888 88 `888P 88 --- end forwarded text ----------------- Robert Hettinga (rah@shipwright.com) Shipwright Development Corporation, 44 Farquhar Street, Boston, MA 02131 USA (617) 323-7923 "Reality is not optional." --Thomas Sowell >>>>Phree Phil: Email: zldf@clark.net http://www.netresponse.com/zldf <<<<< From bounce-ecm@ai.mit.edu Wed Oct 18 07:15:04 1995 Return-Path: Received: by life.ai.mit.edu (4.1/AI-4.10) for /com/mailer/majordomo-wrapper archive2.pl -a -m -f /com/archive/ecm/ecm.archive id AA18157; Wed, 18 Oct 95 07:15:04 EDT Received: from zork.tiac.net by life.ai.mit.edu (4.1/AI-4.10) for /com/mailer/majordomo-wrapper resend -l ecm -h ai.mit.edu -s -r ecm ecm-outgoing id AA18123; Wed, 18 Oct 95 07:14:58 EDT Received: from [199.0.65.105] (FlyingCloud.tiac.net [199.0.65.105]) by zork.tiac.net (8.6.9/8.6.6.Beta9) with SMTP id HAA04055; Wed, 18 Oct 1995 07:14:54 -0400 X-Sender: rah@tiac.net Message-Id: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Date: Wed, 18 Oct 1995 07:15:11 -0400 To: www-buyinfo@allegra.att.com, ecm@ai.mit.edu From: rah@shipwright.com (Robert Hettinga) Subject: (cpx) Re: [ANNOUNCEMENT] eCash reality !! Sender: bounce-ecm@ai.mit.edu Precedence: bulk Reply-To: rah@shipwright.com (Robert Hettinga) --- begin forwarded text Date: Tue, 17 Oct 1995 23:07:15 -0400 Subject: Re: [ANNOUNCEMENT] eCash reality !! To: cypherpunks@toad.com From: shamrock@netcom.com (Lucky Green) X-Server-Version: Cactus-Serv 1.5 Sender: owner-cypherpunks@toad.com Precedence: bulk -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- In article <3R85cD1w165w@berserk.com>, usura@berserk.com (Alex de Joode) wrote: > e-WAVE [issue 42], a dutch language electronic newsletter > published by Riverland Publications, reports that DigiCash > has reached agreement with a big US bank to make eCash real. > > DigiCash promised the 'scoop' to Newsweek, so in next monday's > issue of Newsweek we will know wich bank that is. (They are also > said to be talking with a Dutch or Belgian bank or financial > institution). > > Since there has been cut a deal with the monetary powers I wonder > if we get the whole anonymous ecash or a 'diluted spieces'. It will have the same features as the Ecash used in the trial. Payer is anonymous, but the payee isn't. I hope that I'll be able to finish some perl scripts that add this badly needed, but for political reasons missing, feature by the end of the month. - --- [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 iQBFAwUBMIRvWioZzwIn1bdtAQHT8wF+JUheIIJxAV4ER1+lPddZhr744rR9N0/f Ps0CIGNK9Ie16XVBMXx4J0OkKqCjP0PW =HFWw -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- --- end forwarded text ----------------- Robert Hettinga (rah@shipwright.com) Shipwright Development Corporation, 44 Farquhar Street, Boston, MA 02131 USA (617) 323-7923 "Reality is not optional." --Thomas Sowell >>>>Phree Phil: Email: zldf@clark.net http://www.netresponse.com/zldf <<<<< From bounce-ecm@ai.mit.edu Wed Oct 18 15:37:27 1995 Return-Path: Received: by life.ai.mit.edu (4.1/AI-4.10) for /com/mailer/majordomo-wrapper archive2.pl -a -m -f /com/archive/ecm/ecm.archive id AA19343; Wed, 18 Oct 95 15:37:27 EDT Received: from zork.tiac.net by life.ai.mit.edu (4.1/AI-4.10) for /com/mailer/majordomo-wrapper resend -l ecm -h ai.mit.edu -s -r ecm ecm-outgoing id AA19289; Wed, 18 Oct 95 15:36:24 EDT Received: from [199.0.65.105] (FlyingCloud.tiac.net [199.0.65.105]) by zork.tiac.net (8.6.9/8.6.6.Beta9) with SMTP id PAA04282; Wed, 18 Oct 1995 15:36:22 -0400 X-Sender: rah@tiac.net Message-Id: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Date: Wed, 18 Oct 1995 15:36:38 -0400 To: ecm@ai.mit.edu, bsdc@ai.mit.edu, cypherpunks@toad.com From: rah@shipwright.com (Robert Hettinga) Subject: (buyinfo Req:) Stored value card alliances? Sender: bounce-ecm@ai.mit.edu Precedence: bulk Reply-To: rah@shipwright.com (Robert Hettinga) --- begin forwarded text Date: Wed, 18 Oct 95 09:03:00 -0400 From: Mark Sender: Mark Organization: Bruce Morgan Associates, Inc. To: www-buyinfo@allegra.att.com Subject: Would someone be able recommend a table listing all the various store-value card and digital cash strategic alliances? --- end forwarded text ----------------- Robert Hettinga (rah@shipwright.com) Shipwright Development Corporation, 44 Farquhar Street, Boston, MA 02131 USA (617) 323-7923 "Reality is not optional." --Thomas Sowell >>>>Phree Phil: Email: zldf@clark.net http://www.netresponse.com/zldf <<<<< From bounce-ecm@ai.mit.edu Wed Oct 18 16:20:37 1995 Return-Path: Received: by life.ai.mit.edu (4.1/AI-4.10) for /com/mailer/majordomo-wrapper archive2.pl -a -m -f /com/archive/ecm/ecm.archive id AA22123; Wed, 18 Oct 95 16:20:37 EDT Received: from infinity.c2.org by life.ai.mit.edu (4.1/AI-4.10) for /com/mailer/majordomo-wrapper resend -l ecm -h ai.mit.edu -s -r ecm ecm-outgoing id AA22109; Wed, 18 Oct 95 16:20:29 EDT Received: (from nobody@localhost) by infinity.c2.org (8.6.12/8.6.9) id NAA13200; Wed, 18 Oct 1995 13:15:22 -0700 Community ConneXion: Privacy & Community: Date: Wed, 18 Oct 1995 13:15:22 -0700 Message-Id: <199510182015.NAA13200@infinity.c2.org> To: ecm@ai.mit.edu Cc: ecash-market@unicorn.com From: ecash-market@unicorn.com Subject: New buy offer Sender: bounce-ecm@ai.mit.edu Precedence: bulk Reply-To: ecash-market@unicorn.com E=10000 RATE(per c$100)=US$3.00 BUY-OFFER 1995-09-18 13:15 10 EUID=http://www.c2.org/~mark/ecash/ecash.html From bounce-ecm@ai.mit.edu Thu Oct 19 09:13:08 1995 Return-Path: Received: by life.ai.mit.edu (4.1/AI-4.10) for /com/mailer/majordomo-wrapper archive2.pl -a -m -f /com/archive/ecm/ecm.archive id AA07862; Thu, 19 Oct 95 09:13:08 EDT Received: from zork.tiac.net by life.ai.mit.edu (4.1/AI-4.10) for /com/mailer/majordomo-wrapper resend -l ecm -h ai.mit.edu -s -r ecm ecm-outgoing id AA07831; Thu, 19 Oct 95 09:11:44 EDT Received: from [199.0.65.105] (FlyingCloud.tiac.net [199.0.65.105]) by zork.tiac.net (8.6.9/8.6.6.Beta9) with SMTP id JAA15627; Thu, 19 Oct 1995 09:11:42 -0400 X-Sender: rah@tiac.net Message-Id: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Date: Thu, 19 Oct 1995 09:11:57 -0400 To: ecm@ai.mit.edu, www-buyinfo@allegra.att.com From: rah@shipwright.com (Robert Hettinga) Subject: (cpx) REMINDER: SF Federal Building, Oct 20, 1015AM: Bernstein case Sender: bounce-ecm@ai.mit.edu Precedence: bulk Reply-To: rah@shipwright.com (Robert Hettinga) --- begin forwarded text To: cypherpunks@toad.com, cypherpunks-announce@toad.com, gnu@toad.com Subject: REMINDER: SF Federal Building, Oct 20, 1015AM: Bernstein case Date: Wed, 18 Oct 1995 19:45:03 -0700 From: John Gilmore Sender: owner-cypherpunks@toad.com Precedence: bulk Last reminder! Come to the Federal Building in SF this Friday at 10:15AM, go upstairs to Judge Marilyn Hall Patel's courtroom, and Be There for the first skirmish in the trial of crypto export controls. 450 Golden Gate Avenue in downtown SF, two blocks from Van Ness. We've gotten a lot of press interest. Both the legal-newspapers in SF, the Examiner, and many others will be covering it. Some of them breathlessly asked, "Will the cypherpunks hold a demonstration?", but what we will demonstrate is how the legal system can turn against the bureaucrats and authoritarians who currently hold crypto hostage. This will be a low-key meeting, quietly bearing witness, at least before we adjourn to a probably rowdy lunch at Max's Opera Cafe at Van Ness and Golden Gate Avenues. If you can't come to the hearing, at least come for lunch! And don't forget, it's a costume party: Dress like a banker. Even you bitbankers. Even me. See you there! John --- end forwarded text ----------------- Robert Hettinga (rah@shipwright.com) Shipwright Development Corporation, 44 Farquhar Street, Boston, MA 02131 USA (617) 323-7923 "Reality is not optional." --Thomas Sowell >>>>Phree Phil: Email: zldf@clark.net http://www.netresponse.com/zldf <<<<< From bounce-ecm@ai.mit.edu Thu Oct 19 18:07:26 1995 Return-Path: Received: by life.ai.mit.edu (4.1/AI-4.10) for /com/mailer/majordomo-wrapper archive2.pl -a -m -f /com/archive/ecm/ecm.archive id AA13219; Thu, 19 Oct 95 18:07:26 EDT Received: from mailgate.isltd.insignia.com by life.ai.mit.edu (4.1/AI-4.10) for /com/mailer/majordomo-wrapper resend -l ecm -h ai.mit.edu -s -r ecm ecm-outgoing id AA13212; Thu, 19 Oct 95 18:07:19 EDT X-Address: Insignia Solutions plc., High Wycombe, Bucks, HP11 1JU, UK X-Telephone: +44 1494 459426 X-Fax: +44 1494 459720 Received: from aston.isltd.insignia.com.isltd.insignia.com (aston.isltd.insignia.com) by mailgate.isltd.insignia.com (5.65c8/UK-2.1.ISL) with SMTP id AA02478; Thu, 19 Oct 1995 23:07:10 +0100 From: Mark Grant Date: Thu, 19 Oct 95 23:09:34 BST Message-Id: <19106.9510192209@aston.isltd.insignia.com.isltd.insignia.com> Subject: Re: (cpx) [ANNOUNCEMENT] eCash reality !! To: ecm@ai.mit.edu Sender: bounce-ecm@ai.mit.edu Precedence: bulk Reply-To: Mark Grant rah@shipwright.com (Robert Hettinga) said : > e-WAVE [issue 42], a dutch language electronic newsletter > published by Riverland Publications, reports that DigiCash > has reached agreement with a big US bank to make eCash real. > > DigiCash promised the 'scoop' to Newsweek, so in next monday's > issue of Newsweek we will know wich bank that is. (They are also > said to be talking with a Dutch or Belgian bank or financial > institution). Yay ! Congratulations ! Now, what's the deal with a UK citizen getting an account with a Dutch or Belgian bank, and what are their banking privacy laws like ? A lot better than the US, I presume ? Mark From bounce-ecm@ai.mit.edu Fri Oct 20 01:47:52 1995 Return-Path: Received: by life.ai.mit.edu (4.1/AI-4.10) for /com/mailer/majordomo-wrapper archive2.pl -a -m -f /com/archive/ecm/ecm.archive id AA05085; Fri, 20 Oct 95 01:47:52 EDT Received: from netcom6.netcom.com by life.ai.mit.edu (4.1/AI-4.10) for /com/mailer/majordomo-wrapper resend -l ecm -h ai.mit.edu -s -r ecm ecm-outgoing id AA05078; Fri, 20 Oct 95 01:47:40 EDT Received: from DialupEudora by netcom6.netcom.com (8.6.12/Netcom) id WAA20301; Thu, 19 Oct 1995 22:21:06 -0700 X-Sender: shamrock@localhost Message-Id: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Date: Thu, 19 Oct 1995 22:26:39 -0800 To: Mark Grant , ecm@ai.mit.edu From: shamrock@netcom.com (Lucky Green) Subject: Re: (cpx) [ANNOUNCEMENT] eCash reality !! Sender: bounce-ecm@ai.mit.edu Precedence: bulk Reply-To: shamrock@netcom.com (Lucky Green) At 23:09 10/19/95, Mark Grant wrote: >Now, what's the deal with a UK citizen getting an account with a Dutch >or Belgian bank, and what are their banking privacy laws like ? A lot >better than the US, I presume ? Unfortunately not. The US holds that its laws apply to all humans regardless of their citizenship or physical location. Non-US banks either comply or pay the price. See Doug Barnes' report on the International Money Laundring Conference recently held in San Francisco, available on the CP archives. Some countries still provide reasonable privacy to bank customers. The Netherlands and Belgium are not among them. -- Lucky Green PGP encrypted mail preferred. From bounce-ecm@ai.mit.edu Fri Oct 20 05:53:38 1995 Return-Path: Received: by life.ai.mit.edu (4.1/AI-4.10) for /com/mailer/majordomo-wrapper archive2.pl -a -m -f /com/archive/ecm/ecm.archive id AA09777; Fri, 20 Oct 95 05:53:38 EDT Received: from zork.tiac.net by life.ai.mit.edu (4.1/AI-4.10) for /com/mailer/majordomo-wrapper resend -l ecm -h ai.mit.edu -s -r ecm ecm-outgoing id AA09756; Fri, 20 Oct 95 05:52:11 EDT Received: from [199.0.65.105] (FlyingCloud.tiac.net [199.0.65.105]) by zork.tiac.net (8.6.9/8.6.6.Beta9) with SMTP id FAA04927; Fri, 20 Oct 1995 05:52:18 -0400 X-Sender: rah@tiac.net Message-Id: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Date: Fri, 20 Oct 1995 05:52:24 -0400 To: www-buyinfo@allegra.att.com, ecm@ai.mit.edu, bsdc@ai.mit.edu From: rah@shipwright.com (Robert Hettinga) Subject: (cpx) FWD: ANSI to work on e-payment -- first meeting coming up Sender: bounce-ecm@ai.mit.edu Precedence: bulk Reply-To: rah@shipwright.com (Robert Hettinga) --- begin forwarded text From: Rich Salz Date: Fri, 20 Oct 1995 00:13:59 -0400 To: cypherpunks@toad.com Subject: ANSI to work on e-payment -- first meeting coming up Sender: owner-cypherpunks@toad.com Precedence: bulk First Meeting of Electronic Commerce Work Group November 29, Washington, DC ANSI Accredited Standards Committee X9 - Financial Services - in response to the explosion of payment transaction proposals for the internet, has approved a new work item to develop a single secure electronic payment syntax. The first meeting of the Electronic Commerce Work Group will be Wednesday, November 29 from 9:00am till 5:00pm at the American Bankers Association, 1120 Connecticut Ave, NW, Washington, DC 20036. Agenda Review of Scope of Work Consideration of Federal Reserve Request to expand scope to Bank-Bank messages Presentation from Industry groups with existing payment protocols Assignment of work items New items Next meetings (Jan/Feb. - San Francisco, May - Boston??) A draft scope: The payment syntax described in this standard is designed to order a financial institution to make payment to a merchant from an account of a purchaser based on the near term delivery of low monetary value goods or services. It will be possible to include this payment order in any electronic protocol that is based on communications between the purchaser and the merchant, and between the merchant and a financial institution. This standard does not describe, nor recommend, any particular communications protocol. When used within a complete payment infrastructure, the secure payment order described shall offer privacy and integrity of the purchaser's payment information, and shall prevent the purchaser from successfully repudiating the sending, or the merchant from successfully repudiating the receiving, of a valid payment order. Thus the financial institution can be sure that its customer requested the payment and that the merchant can be accurately identified on the account statement. About ASC X9 ASC X9 is the accredited standards developer which brings together banks, securities trading companies, equipment and software manufactures, associations and others in the financial services industry to develop voluntary nationally accepted standards based on industry consensus. Founded in 1976, ASC X9 was accredited by the American National Standards institute in 1984. The American Bankers Association serves as X9 Secretariat. For more information on X9, contact the secretariat at 202/663-5300, for more information on the Electronic Commerce Work Group, contact its chair, Tom Jones at 602/554-3569. --- end forwarded text ----------------- Robert Hettinga (rah@shipwright.com) Shipwright Development Corporation, 44 Farquhar Street, Boston, MA 02131 USA (617) 323-7923 "Reality is not optional." --Thomas Sowell >>>>Phree Phil: Email: zldf@clark.net http://www.netresponse.com/zldf <<<<< From bounce-ecm@ai.mit.edu Fri Oct 20 14:29:08 1995 Return-Path: Received: by life.ai.mit.edu (4.1/AI-4.10) for /com/mailer/majordomo-wrapper archive2.pl -a -m -f /com/archive/ecm/ecm.archive id AA05074; Fri, 20 Oct 95 14:29:08 EDT Received: from infinity.c2.org ([140.174.185.11]) by life.ai.mit.edu (4.1/AI-4.10) for /com/mailer/majordomo-wrapper resend -l ecm -h ai.mit.edu -s -r ecm ecm-outgoing id AA05061; Fri, 20 Oct 95 14:28:59 EDT Received: (from nobody@localhost) by infinity.c2.org (8.7.1/8.6.9) id LAA06705; Fri, 20 Oct 1995 11:23:26 -0700 (PDT) Community ConneXion: Privacy & Community: Date: Fri, 20 Oct 1995 11:23:26 -0700 (PDT) Message-Id: <199510201823.LAA06705@infinity.c2.org> To: ecm@ai.mit.edu Cc: ecash-market@unicorn.com From: ecash-market@unicorn.com Subject: New buy offer Sender: bounce-ecm@ai.mit.edu Precedence: bulk Reply-To: ecash-market@unicorn.com E=1000000 RATE(per c$100)=100 BUY-OFFER 1995-09-20 11:23 11 EUID=http://www.c2.org/~mark/ecash/ecash.html From bounce-ecm@ai.mit.edu Sat Oct 21 08:08:44 1995 Return-Path: Received: by life.ai.mit.edu (4.1/AI-4.10) for /com/mailer/majordomo-wrapper archive2.pl -a -m -f /com/archive/ecm/ecm.archive id AA15958; Sat, 21 Oct 95 08:08:44 EDT Received: from zork.tiac.net by life.ai.mit.edu (4.1/AI-4.10) for /com/mailer/majordomo-wrapper resend -l ecm -h ai.mit.edu -s -r ecm ecm-outgoing id AA15951; Sat, 21 Oct 95 08:08:40 EDT Received: from [199.0.65.105] (FlyingCloud.tiac.net [199.0.65.105]) by zork.tiac.net (8.6.9/8.6.6.Beta9) with SMTP id IAA01694; Sat, 21 Oct 1995 08:08:58 -0400 X-Sender: rah@tiac.net Message-Id: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Date: Sat, 21 Oct 1995 08:08:55 -0400 To: www-buyinfo@allegra.att.com, ecm@ai.mit.edu From: rah@shipwright.com (Robert Hettinga) Subject: (cpx) Re: digital cash and identity disclosure Sender: bounce-ecm@ai.mit.edu Precedence: bulk Reply-To: rah@shipwright.com (Robert Hettinga) --- begin forwarded text Date: Fri, 20 Oct 1995 22:10:04 -0400 (EDT) From: Michael Froomkin To: Holger Reif Cc: sjb@universe.digex.net, wilcoxb@nag.cs.colorado.edu, cypherpunks@toad.com Subject: Re: digital cash and identity disclosure Mime-Version: 1.0 Sender: owner-cypherpunks@toad.com Precedence: bulk i would like to propose the following radical idea: Chaumian digicash is a nice curiosity. The future in the mdeium term (10+ years) for better or worse belongs to Mondex. Comments? A. Michael Froomkin | +1 (305) 284-4285; +1 (305) 284-6506 (fax) Associate Professor of Law | U. Miami School of Law | froomkin@law.miami.edu P.O. Box 248087 | http://www.law.miami.edu/~froomkin Coral Gables, FL 33124 USA | It's hot here. And humid. --- end forwarded text ----------------- Robert Hettinga (rah@shipwright.com) Shipwright Development Corporation, 44 Farquhar Street, Boston, MA 02131 USA (617) 323-7923 "Reality is not optional." --Thomas Sowell >>>>Phree Phil: Email: zldf@clark.net http://www.netresponse.com/zldf <<<<< From bounce-ecm@ai.mit.edu Sat Oct 21 12:12:38 1995 Return-Path: Received: by life.ai.mit.edu (4.1/AI-4.10) for /com/mailer/majordomo-wrapper archive2.pl -a -m -f /com/archive/ecm/ecm.archive id AA25736; Sat, 21 Oct 95 12:12:38 EDT Received: from infinity.c2.org by life.ai.mit.edu (4.1/AI-4.10) for /com/mailer/majordomo-wrapper resend -l ecm -h ai.mit.edu -s -r ecm ecm-outgoing id AA25729; Sat, 21 Oct 95 12:12:28 EDT Received: (from nobody@localhost) by infinity.c2.org (8.7.1/8.6.9) id JAA04147; Sat, 21 Oct 1995 09:06:49 -0700 (PDT) Community ConneXion: Privacy & Community: Date: Sat, 21 Oct 1995 09:06:49 -0700 (PDT) Message-Id: <199510211606.JAA04147@infinity.c2.org> To: ecm@ai.mit.edu Cc: ecash-market@unicorn.com From: ecash-market@unicorn.com Subject: New buy offer Sender: bounce-ecm@ai.mit.edu Precedence: bulk Reply-To: ecash-market@unicorn.com E=1000000 RATE(per c$100)=100 BUY-OFFER 1995-09-21 09:06 12 EUID=http://www.c2.org/~mark/ecash/ecash.html From bounce-ecm@ai.mit.edu Sun Oct 22 14:07:22 1995 Return-Path: Received: by life.ai.mit.edu (4.1/AI-4.10) for /com/mailer/majordomo-wrapper archive2.pl -a -m -f /com/archive/ecm/ecm.archive id AA23168; Sun, 22 Oct 95 14:07:22 EDT Received: from zork.tiac.net by life.ai.mit.edu (4.1/AI-4.10) for /com/mailer/majordomo-wrapper resend -l ecm -h ai.mit.edu -s -r ecm ecm-outgoing id AA23146; Sun, 22 Oct 95 14:06:55 EDT Received: from [199.0.65.105] (FlyingCloud.tiac.net [199.0.65.105]) by zork.tiac.net (8.6.9/8.6.6.Beta9) with SMTP id OAA26446; Sun, 22 Oct 1995 14:07:20 -0400 X-Sender: rah@tiac.net Message-Id: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Date: Sun, 22 Oct 1995 14:06:51 -0400 To: www-buyinfo@allegra.att.com, ecm@ai.mit.edu, bsdc@ai.mit.edu From: rah@shipwright.com (Robert Hettinga) Subject: (cpx) Mondex vs. Digicash (was: Godzilla vs. Mothra) Sender: bounce-ecm@ai.mit.edu Precedence: bulk Reply-To: rah@shipwright.com (Robert Hettinga) --- begin forwarded text X-Sender: cman@mail.communities.com Mime-Version: 1.0 Date: Sun, 22 Oct 1995 10:35:10 -0800 To: cypherpunks@toad.com From: cman@communities.com (Douglas Barnes) Subject: Mondex vs. Digicash (was: Godzilla vs. Mothra) Cc: Stephan Somogyi , froomkin@law.miami.edu Sender: owner-cypherpunks@toad.com Precedence: bulk I disagree with Michael's assertion that Mondex will necessarily win over Digicash. Here's why: o The availability of Digicash in the US, for real, with spender anonymity, will be announced very soon; reporter activity on this subject is consistent with an embargoed press release for Monday or Tuesday. From posts to the list it's clear that a fully working system, ready for customers, will be announced. o When doing market research on this subject, it became clear that low-value payments are largely going to be used for impulse purchases. If the Digicash system allows people to set up their accounts without getting out of their chairs (which I suspect will be the case, if they do it right), it will initially get more adopters. o One or both systems could be found to have serious security problems; who knows what the outcome of their discovery & exploitation would be? I know at least one group of people who believe they have a good line on a serious security problem in Mondex. o Even if the Mondex hardware were given away for free, think how much fun it is for the average user to add a new piece of hardware to their machines... ever install a sound card and CD-ROM drive on a PC? I remember reading something like 20% of all "multimedia" kits were returned, largely due to user install problems. If there is a competing method that costs the same and _doesn't_ require the hardware, people will tend go with this. o In my conversations with state and federal regulators, it is clear that it _is_ possible to issue spender-anonymous e-cash. If you ask them, "Hey, can I create fully anonymous digital cash?", they go apeshit, but if you explain that the money uses existing (auditable) channels going in, and existing (auditable) channels going out, and that only spenders are anonymous, they relax considerably. They may change their minds later, but we're about to get an existence proof. o It's not clear that _either_ system is going to win completely in the next 10+ years. Although there's been considerable shakeout in the last ten years, there is still a huge variety of non-electronic payment methods -- how can you be so sure that Mondex will win over Digicash, and that they won't co-exist like, say, money orders, currency and cashier's checks (three instruments with both similar and dissimilar attirbutes)? Douglas Barnes Electric Communities --- end forwarded text ----------------- Robert Hettinga (rah@shipwright.com) Shipwright Development Corporation, 44 Farquhar Street, Boston, MA 02131 USA (617) 323-7923 "Reality is not optional." --Thomas Sowell >>>>Phree Phil: Email: zldf@clark.net http://www.netresponse.com/zldf <<<<< From bounce-ecm@ai.mit.edu Sun Oct 22 21:45:06 1995 Return-Path: Received: by life.ai.mit.edu (4.1/AI-4.10) for /com/mailer/majordomo-wrapper archive2.pl -a -m -f /com/archive/ecm/ecm.archive id AA11280; Sun, 22 Oct 95 21:45:06 EDT Received: from nagina.cs.colorado.edu by life.ai.mit.edu (4.1/AI-4.10) for /com/mailer/majordomo-wrapper resend -l ecm -h ai.mit.edu -s -r ecm ecm-outgoing id AA11246; Sun, 22 Oct 95 21:44:58 EDT Received: from nagina.cs.colorado.edu (localhost.cs.colorado.edu [127.0.0.1]) by nagina.cs.colorado.edu (8.6.10/8.6.10) with ESMTP id TAA00341; Sun, 22 Oct 1995 19:44:56 -0600 Message-Id: <199510230144.TAA00341@nagina.cs.colorado.edu> To: cypherpunks@toad.com, ecm@ai.mit.edu Subject: hot news at DigiCash Date: Sun, 22 Oct 1995 19:44:55 -0600 From: Bryce Sender: bounce-ecm@ai.mit.edu Precedence: bulk Reply-To: Bryce -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hot news at DigiCash. One, a real live bank is going to be issuing Ecash denominated in U.S. dollars. See "http://www.digicash.com/" and "http://www.marktwain.com/". Two, the one million trial cyberbucks have been issued and no more will be issued, although the First Digital Bank will continue to run the trial for now. In honor of the occasion I hereby offer E=100 US=$8.00 SELL-OFFER "Sun Oct 22 19:34:28 MDT 1995" 2 bryce@colorado.edu Pretty soon we'll be able to exchange First Digital Bank trial cyberbucks for Mark Twain Bank cyberbucks denominated in U.S. Dollars. I wonder if our trial cyberbucks will be considered collector's items? I know that I will always be proud of *mine*... Bryce signatures follow "To strive, to seek, to find and not to yield." bryce@colorado.edu -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: 2.6.2 Comment: Auto-signed under Unix with 'BAP' Easy-PGP v1.01 iQCVAwUBMIrzb/WZSllhfG25AQEGNAQApa3hQlc7jWZBIzsSUqh4o6LQfhoCPzaJ dEOHWDTS+1L8IyNo1PS3Z0hZNeDDiGda7PsilwLouH6M8kUtD7BFXyU/31QDZnXq oLdiq/OJ3A5U04ElEtRXRn7m0eQtoPv4V41UkR0GGkLx93DyGPC6ecXX4vE14oKq jLc4Dt296gc= =gnEm -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- From bounce-ecm@ai.mit.edu Sun Oct 22 23:31:20 1995 Return-Path: Received: by life.ai.mit.edu (4.1/AI-4.10) for /com/mailer/majordomo-wrapper archive2.pl -a -m -f /com/archive/ecm/ecm.archive id AA15155; Sun, 22 Oct 95 23:31:20 EDT Received: from zork.tiac.net by life.ai.mit.edu (4.1/AI-4.10) for /com/mailer/majordomo-wrapper resend -l ecm -h ai.mit.edu -s -r ecm ecm-outgoing id AA15110; Sun, 22 Oct 95 23:30:43 EDT Received: from [199.0.65.105] (FlyingCloud.tiac.net [199.0.65.105]) by zork.tiac.net (8.6.9/8.6.6.Beta9) with SMTP id XAA29178; Sun, 22 Oct 1995 23:31:13 -0400 X-Sender: rah@tiac.net Message-Id: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Date: Sun, 22 Oct 1995 23:30:42 -0400 To: www-buyinfo@allegra.att.com, ecm@ai.mit.edu, bsdc@ai.mit.edu From: rah@shipwright.com (Robert Hettinga) Subject: (cpx) Real ECash from Mark Twain Bank Sender: bounce-ecm@ai.mit.edu Precedence: bulk Reply-To: rah@shipwright.com (Robert Hettinga) --- begin forwarded text Date: Sun, 22 Oct 1995 17:47:43 -0700 From: Hal To: cypherpunks@toad.com Subject: Real ECash from Mark Twain Bank Sender: owner-cypherpunks@toad.com Precedence: bulk will apparently have info on its "real ecash" starting late Sunday, October 22. It is not there yet at 6 PM pacific time. will have a press release soon, as well. Here is what it says now: > First Real Electronic Cash Launched > > Copyright ) 1995 by DigiCash bv. > > FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE (Release Date: October 23, 1995) > > This page will be available very soon. --- end forwarded text ----------------- Robert Hettinga (rah@shipwright.com) Shipwright Development Corporation, 44 Farquhar Street, Boston, MA 02131 USA (617) 323-7923 "Reality is not optional." --Thomas Sowell >>>>Phree Phil: Email: zldf@clark.net http://www.netresponse.com/zldf <<<<< From bounce-ecm@ai.mit.edu Sun Oct 22 23:31:01 1995 Return-Path: Received: by life.ai.mit.edu (4.1/AI-4.10) for /com/mailer/majordomo-wrapper archive2.pl -a -m -f /com/archive/ecm/ecm.archive id AA15133; Sun, 22 Oct 95 23:31:01 EDT Received: from zork.tiac.net by life.ai.mit.edu (4.1/AI-4.10) for /com/mailer/majordomo-wrapper resend -l ecm -h ai.mit.edu -s -r ecm ecm-outgoing id AA15126; Sun, 22 Oct 95 23:30:58 EDT Received: from [199.0.65.105] (FlyingCloud.tiac.net [199.0.65.105]) by zork.tiac.net (8.6.9/8.6.6.Beta9) with SMTP id XAA29208; Sun, 22 Oct 1995 23:31:23 -0400 X-Sender: rah@tiac.net Message-Id: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Date: Sun, 22 Oct 1995 23:30:52 -0400 To: www-buyinfo@allegra.att.com, ecm@ai.mit.edu From: rah@shipwright.com (Robert Hettinga) Subject: (cpx) Re: Mondex vs. Digicash (was: Godzilla vs. Mothra) Sender: bounce-ecm@ai.mit.edu Precedence: bulk Reply-To: rah@shipwright.com (Robert Hettinga) --- begin forwarded text Mime-Version: 1.0 X-Pgp-Fingerprint: 01107BAB1C85F1B49358D98FEAD4339E Date: Sun, 22 Oct 1995 18:43:58 -0700 To: cypherpunks@toad.com From: Stephan Somogyi Subject: Re: Mondex vs. Digicash (was: Godzilla vs. Mothra) Cc: cman@communities.com (Douglas Barnes), froomkin@law.miami.edu Sender: owner-cypherpunks@toad.com Precedence: bulk At 10:35 22.10.95, Douglas Barnes wrote: > If the Digicash system allows people to set up their > accounts without getting out of their chairs (which I suspect will > be the case, if they do it right), it will initially get more > adopters. Agreed, especially since it's going to be a while until Mondex, NetBill et al are accessible by consumers outside of the trial areas. I wonder whether this DigiCash announcement will be a limited trial or a full-blown deployment. > I know at least one group of people who believe they have a good line > on a serious security problem in Mondex. Mondex is definitely practicing security by obscurity. Tim Jones, Mondex's CEO, was very cagey last week at the e-commerce conference about how transaction mechanics and where various public and private keys reside. I have serious questions about some aspects of Mondex's security. > o Even if the Mondex hardware were given away for free, think how > much fun it is for the average user to add a new piece of hardware > to their machines... ever install a sound card and CD-ROM drive on > a PC? I remember reading something like 20% of all "multimedia" > kits were returned, largely due to user install problems. If there > is a competing method that costs the same and _doesn't_ require > the hardware, people will tend go with this. Depends on the hardware. I recently saw a pamphlet for a mag-stripe + smart card reader with a numeric keyboard for PIN entry that plugs into a PC as a bump in the wire between the keyboard and the CPU. The company is in Arizona; I can't recall the name offhand. Adding smart card capability to a PC is not in the same league of user hassle as a multimedia upgrade. It's also much cheaper. > but if you explain that the money uses existing (auditable) > channels going in, and existing (auditable) channels going out, and > that only spenders are anonymous, they relax considerably. They may > change their minds later, but we're about to get an existence proof. The problem is with peer-to-peer transactions that don't go through a bank. Mondex claims that such transactions are anonymous and unaudited. What would stop someone from moving a 500 pound per-card maximum from one card to the next and then back up into the system elsewhere? I'm under the impression that Mondex's value isn't serialized the way DigiCash's is, so you can't track the value itself. And if the cards themselves keep no records of transactions made with peer devices, tracking seems rather tricky. > how can you be so sure that Mondex will win over > Digicash, and that they won't co-exist like, say, money orders, > currency and cashier's checks (three instruments with both similar > and dissimilar attirbutes)? The different schemes have enough overlap that it's not clear to me that a single bank will want to support multiple as yet untried systems. Admittedly, we haven't yet seen which bank is working with DigiCash, but Mondex has some pretty heavy hitters behind it already. Since DigiCash is Internet-focused and Mondex is a non-net-specific system that can be adapted for use over the Net, it seems to me that a bank adopting Mondex would get more out of its investment than if it bought into DigiCash. Banks are going to get into some kind of e-cash system sooner than later, and Mondex seems to be the farthest along. _______________________________________________________________________ Stephan Somogyi Senior Editor Digital Media --- end forwarded text ----------------- Robert Hettinga (rah@shipwright.com) Shipwright Development Corporation, 44 Farquhar Street, Boston, MA 02131 USA (617) 323-7923 "Reality is not optional." --Thomas Sowell >>>>Phree Phil: Email: zldf@clark.net http://www.netresponse.com/zldf <<<<< From bounce-ecm@ai.mit.edu Sun Oct 22 23:47:46 1995 Return-Path: Received: by life.ai.mit.edu (4.1/AI-4.10) for /com/mailer/majordomo-wrapper archive2.pl -a -m -f /com/archive/ecm/ecm.archive id AA16304; Sun, 22 Oct 95 23:47:46 EDT Received: from dc.digicash.com by life.ai.mit.edu (4.1/AI-4.10) for /com/mailer/majordomo-wrapper resend -l ecm -h ai.mit.edu -s -r ecm ecm-outgoing id AA16297; Sun, 22 Oct 95 23:47:35 EDT Received: from digicash.com (digicash.com [193.78.226.2]) by dc.digicash.com (8.6.11/8.6.9) with ESMTP id EAA14982; Mon, 23 Oct 1995 04:47:29 +0100 Received: (from bigmac@localhost) by digicash.com (8.6.10/8.6.6) id EAA23772; Mon, 23 Oct 1995 04:47:43 +0100 Date: Mon, 23 Oct 1995 04:47:43 +0100 From: Marcel van der Peijl Message-Id: <199510230347.EAA23772@digicash.com> To: cypherpunks@toad.com, ecm@ai.mit.edu, www-buyinfo@allegra.att.com Subject: Mark Twain Bank Launches Ecash Sender: bounce-ecm@ai.mit.edu Precedence: bulk Reply-To: Marcel van der Peijl ---------------------------PRESS RELEASE------------------------ Release date: Contact DigiCash New York: Monday, October 23, 1995 Mr. Daniel M. Eldridge Amsterdam, The Netherlands Tel: +1 212 909 2955 (direct) +1 212 909 4092 (main) Fax: +1 212 318 1222 email: eldridge@digicash.com Contact DigiCash Amsterdam: Contact Mark Twain Bank St. Louis: Mr. Paul Dinnissen Mr. Frank O. Trotter, III Tel: +31 20 665 2611 Tel: +1 314 997 9213 Fax: +31 20 668 5486 Fax: +1 314 569 4906 email: press@digicash.com email: ftrotter@marktwain.com http://www.digicash.com/ http://www.marktwain.com/ Mark Twain Bank Launches Ecash ============================== ----------------------------------------------------- Mark Twain Bank begins operating DigiCash's ecash(TM) on the Internet with U.S. Dollars ----------------------------------------------------- Mark Twain Bank of St. Louis Missouri starts accepting applications Monday October 23, 1995 for accounts that can be used to withdraw and deposit ecash over the Internet. DigiCash(TM) bv, of Amsterdam, the Netherlands, developer of ecash, is supplying the technology to Mark Twain Bank under non-exclusive license. The technology has been tested with a 'monopoly(TM) money' currency called CyberBucks(TM), but this U.S. dollar denominated system is the first time electronic cash is actually being offered using real currency. "This launch marks the beginning of a new era, one in which the digital equivalent of paper money and coins will become even more important than their physical precursors are today," according to Dr. David Chaum, Managing Director of DigiCash bv and inventor of electronic cash. "It will catalyze enormous growth in electronic commerce on the Internet, and prove of enduring value through its improved protection of consumers and society at large." Sweden Post, another ecash licensee, owns the retail bank that is responsible for more than 50% of value transfers in Sweden and has direct access to accounts of over 75% of Swedish households. Sweden Post has not yet announced its launch date. How does it work ---------------- Using ecash is like using a virtual ATM (Automatic Teller Machine). When connecting to it over the Internet, you authenticate ownership of your account and request the amount of ecash you want to withdraw, much like in person. But instead of putting paper cash in your wallet, your software stores the digital cash it obtains onto the hard disk of your PC. When you are asked to make a payment on the net, you confirm the amount, purpose and payee and then your ecash software transfers the correct value in coins from your disk. Sellers, ranging from casual participants in the global Internet bazaar to mega-retailers, deposit the digital coins they receive into their accounts. Behind the user interface, your computer actually chooses the serial numbers of the electronic coins based on a random seed. Then it hides them in special encryption envelopes, provides them to the virtual ATM for signing, and removes the envelopes from what is returned--leaving the bank's validating digital signature on the serial numbers. This way, when the bank receives from the shop the coins you spend, it cannot recognize them as coming from any particular withdrawal, because they were hidden in envelopes during withdrawal. And thus the bank cannot know when or where you shop or what you buy. The serial number of each signed coin is unique, allowing the bank to be sure it never accepts the same coin twice. In case you wish to identify the recipient of any of your payments, you can also reveal the serial number and prove that you formed it. And, in case your computer were ever to break down, if you had written down the secret random seed number you chose initially when opening your account, future versions would let you use it to re-create the coins in envelopes and thereby obtain a free re-issue of the signed coins that were lost. How safe is it -------------- Security is fundamental to electronic cash. The cryptographic coding protecting every 5 cent ecash payment is the same as that routinely relied upon for authenticating requests to move huge sums between banks and even for national security. But in principle ecash goes beyond such communications security to achieve true multiparty security: no one (buyer, seller, bank) can cheat anyone else, no matter how they might modify their own software; even if two parties collude, they cannot cheat the third. Replacing paper and coins with ecash would make life much harder for criminals. Because the payer's computer chooses the serial numbers of the coins, he or she can later irrefutably identify blackmarketeers, extortionists, and acceptors of bribes--were they to take ecash. Paper notes, briefcases full of which can be received without leaving any record, allow money laundering and tax evasion today. With ecash, however, all the amounts each person receives are known to their bank. Significant criminal activity could thus be thwarted by completely replacing paper money; moreover, the privacy of ecash would be essential to widespread acceptance of any electronic payment system that in effect becomes mandatory. Early, competing, and future systems ------------------------------------ Customers of Mark Twain Bank will have to fill out an application form that is available over the Internet, mail or fax it in, and receive a password by mail. The bank's unique multi-currency facilities will allow use from many countries. In the future, the ability to withdraw funds from ordinary checking accounts will be as ubiquitous as making withdrawals at physical ATMs today. Frequent visits to digital branches will give banks the opportunity to offer a full range of financial services to their customers. The over 60,000 people who registered for the CyberBucks experiment--more than all the other cyber-payment schemes combined--suggests a high level of support and interest in ecash. DigiCash plans to keep the experiment going for those who wish to continue using it. After CyberBucks went live almost exactly one year ago, and became the first cryptographically protected Internet payment scheme, a plethora of "me-too" schemes have been announced. Most are simply account-based, accepting requests from users to move money from their account to a specified other account, thereby revealing to the central system exactly when, how much, and to whom they pay, and putting users at the mercy of system errors that may result in loss of money or unexpected lock out. Only ecash works with digital coins, empowering people with full control over their side of financial transactions and full control over when and to whom identifying information is released. Ecash is currently software only: once you've opened an account you just download the software over the net and you're ready to run. DigiCash is developing chip cards and simple readers which will give provide even more security and portability of ecash between machines. DigiCash does not aim to operate ecash systems itself, but rather to continue developing new versions and licensing to financial institutions. (The following are trademarks and should always be referred to as such: CyberBucks, DigiCash, ecash, Mark Twain Bank and Monopoly.) * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * DigiCash Backgrounder ===================== History and Mission ------------------- Since beginning operation in April 1990, DigiCash's mission and primary activity has been: to develop and license payment technology products--chip card, software only, and hybrid--that both show the true capability of technology to protect the interests of all participants and are competitive in the market. Founder ------- Dr. David Chaum, managing director of DigiCash, received his Ph.D. in Computer Science from the University of California at Berkeley, then taught at New York University Graduate School of Business Administration and at the University of California, and headed the Cryptography Group at CWI, the Dutch nationally funded center for research in mathematics and computer science, before taking his current position. He has published over 45 original technical articles on cryptography and also founded the International Association for Cryptologic Research. DigiCash Products ----------------- Blue: smart card technology for EMV & prepaid with dynamic public key Conforms to joint Europay, MasterCard, Visa specifications; multiple applications including loyalty and closed systems; superior data integrity in case of malicious/accidental interference/interruption; requires only the smallest and most proven chips, e.g. SC-24 or ST601; mask technology licensing. CAFE: smart card and card-accepting electronic wallet project Consortium of 12 other members founded and chaired by Dr. Chaum of DigiCash; simulation, mask and first readers developed by DigiCash; trial in November 1995 at the European Commission headquarters building; technology trial in participation with related open special interest group and partially funded by the EC. DyniCash: highway-speed road-toll collection system using smart cards Chip card inserts into battery-powered dashboard unit; reflected backscatter microwave technology by industry leader Amtech; prepaid mode has user privacy; open and/or closed pricing schemes; tested extensively in Japan; non-exclusive licensing of the payment technology. Ecash(TM): software only electronic cash system for internet/email Users download software that can make and receive payments; protects users' money like travellers checks and privacy like coins; world-wide experiment with tens of thousands of users; Macintosh, MS-Windows and X-Windows; any WWW browser; user software free with issuer licensing. Facility Card: complete facility management smart-card/reader system Cash replacement, access control, and time/attendance system; now in schools, hospitals, industry, offices, recreation; interfaces to vending, point-of-sale, access control, copiers, phones, gaming; downloadable & upgradeable readers work on-line and/or off-line; sold through VAR's. * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * Early Adopter Companies ======================= AdOne Classified Network (Steve Brotman, +1 212 431 5842, http://www.adone.com/) BizNet Technologies (Doug Mauer, +1 540 231 7715, http://www.bnt.com/) Consensus Development Corporation (Christopher Allen, +1 510 559 1500, http://www.consensus.com/) Delorie Software (http://www.delorie.com/) Global-X-Change Communications (Elliot Burdett, +1 613 235 6865, http://www.globalx.net/) PULVER.COM (Jeff Pulver, +1 917 336 8240, http://www.pulver.com/) Sun Microsystems (Humphrey Polanen, +1 415 336 0022, http://www.sun.com/) The Electronic Frontier Foundation (EFF) (Stanton McCandlish, +1 415 668 7171, http://www.eff.org/) The Electronic Privacy Information Center (EPIC) (Marc Rotenberg, +1 202 546 6520, http://www.epic.org/) The New Sun Newspaper (Lese Dunton, +1 212 799 7402, http://shebute.com/newsun/today/) The Well (Bruce Katz, +1 415 332 4335, http://www.well.com/) Walter Shelby Group (John Buckman, http://www.shelby.com/pub/shelby/) These companies offering their clients ecash(TM) ------------------------------------------------ Husky Labs (David Levine, +1 410 889 3409, http://www.butterfly.net/) (Clients: National Public Radio, The National Geographic Society, PoliticsUSA, Penguin Books, E-Z Communications, Pentagon Cds and Tapes, AfroAmerican Newpapers, Ellicott Machine Corp., The Greater Baltimore Committee Technology Council, National Petroleum Council, Netv, Review.Net, Robert Rytter & Associates, and United States Holocaust Memorial Museum) Organic Online (Brian Behlendorf, +1 415 284 6888, http://www.organic.com/) (Clients: Advertising Age, Saturn Cars, Rubin Postaer Agency, Sybase, Inc., Volvo Cars of North America, Xircom, 1-800-Collect, Conari Press Books, Great Amercian Music Hall, City of Tribes Communications, Octel, Montgomery Securities, Macromedia) Poppe Tyson Advertising (Fergus O'Daly, +1 212 727 5600, http://www.poppe.com/) (Clients: American Express Travel Agency, PSINet Inc., Intercon Systems Corp., Fordham University, New York Cruise Lines Inc., Osram Sylvania, Pfizer, Food Service Group, Ridgewood Savings Bank, Warner Lambert, Drew, EUA COGENEX, New Jersey Travel and Tourism, AT&T, American Isuzu Motors, DataProducts, Magellan, Toshiba America, Computer Systems Division, Toshiba Computer Systems, Toshiba Disk Products, Applied Medical Informatics, Cascade Design Automation, Chrysler Corp. Cirrus Logic, Cypress Semiconductor, Escalade, Hewlett-Packard, Hyundai Electronics America, Intel Corp., International Network Services, Internet Profiles Corp., LANNET, Logic Modeling, Measurex, MIPS Tchnologies, Netscape Communications Corporation, Network Equipment Technologies, Network General, Nokia, North Mountain Software, Premisys Radiomail, Red Herring Magazine, Robert Half International, Sony Electronics Inc., Broadcast Product Group, Sync Research, Synopsys, Synopsys Logic Modeling Group, Touche, Valvoline) * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * Further Documents Available =========================== 1. "The Ease of Using ecash", tutorial, October 1995, 10 pages. (Text with diagrams.) 2. Congressional Testimony: text of testimony delivered by Dr. David Chaum to Committee Hearing of the U.S. House of Representatives:"The Future of Money", Subcommittee on Domestic and International Monetary Policy; Committee on Banking and Financial Services, July 1995, 3 pages. (Text only.) 3. "Achieving Electronic Privacy", by Dr. David Chaum, Scientific American, August 1992, 6 pages. (Text with diagrams.) 4. European Union - Project CAFE: Conditional Access For Europe, brochure, 1994, 2 pages. (Text only online, diagrams and text only by post.) How to obtain documents ----------------------- Items 1-4 are available on our World Wide Web Server at: 1) http://www.digicash.com/publish/ecash_intro/ecash_intro.html 2) http://www.digicash.com/publish/testimony.html 3) http://www.digicash.com/publish/sciam.html 4) http://www.digicash.com/products/projects/cafe.html Please let us know, if you would like to receive any of Items 1-4 in one of the following other formats: a) via electronic mail in plain text (ascii) format, (Item 1 and 4 unavailable) b) via facsimile c) via post ---------------------------PRESS RELEASE------------------------ From bounce-ecm@ai.mit.edu Mon Oct 23 12:07:16 1995 Return-Path: Received: by life.ai.mit.edu (4.1/AI-4.10) for /com/mailer/majordomo-wrapper archive2.pl -a -m -f /com/archive/ecm/ecm.archive id AA11110; Mon, 23 Oct 95 12:07:16 EDT Received: from www10.w3.org by life.ai.mit.edu (4.1/AI-4.10) for /com/mailer/majordomo-wrapper resend -l ecm -h ai.mit.edu -s -r ecm ecm-outgoing id AA11101; Mon, 23 Oct 95 12:07:11 EDT Received: from zorch.w3.org by www10.w3.org (5.0/NSCS-1.0S) id AA27821; Mon, 23 Oct 1995 12:07:08 +0500 Received: from localhost by zorch.w3.org; (5.65/1.1.8.2/07Jul95-1014AM) id AA16948; Mon, 23 Oct 1995 12:06:43 -0400 Message-Id: <9510231606.AA16948@zorch.w3.org> To: rah@shipwright.com (Robert Hettinga), www-buyinfo@allegra.att.com, ecm@ai.mit.edu, bsdc@ai.mit.edu Cc: hallam@w3.org Subject: Re: (cpx) Mondex vs. Digicash (was: Godzilla vs. Mothra) In-Reply-To: Your message of "Sun, 22 Oct 95 14:06:51 EDT." Date: Mon, 23 Oct 95 12:06:43 -0400 From: hallam@w3.org X-Mts: smtp Content-Length: 3696 Sender: bounce-ecm@ai.mit.edu Precedence: bulk Reply-To: hallam@w3.org Some comments on the comments: > The availability of Digicash in the US, for real, with spender anonymity, will be announced very soon; reporter activity on this subject is consistent with an embargoed press release for Monday or Tuesday. From posts to the list it's clear that a fully working system, ready for customers, will be announced. The avbilability in the US I don't consider as meaning much one way or the other. Mondex is avaliable in Swindon in the UK, a very large and very serious real world trial. More importantly Mondex has Wells Fargo Bank behind it and NatWest and HKSB, these are major league players with very tight coupling, cross ownership of subsidiaries etc. > When doing market research on this subject, it became clear that low-value payments are largely going to be used for impulse purchases. If the Digicash system allows people to set up their accounts without getting out of their chairs (which I suspect will be the case, if they do it right), it will initially get more adopters. DigiCash will be limited to the Internet, Mondex is genuine cash, it allows offline purse to purse transactions. > One or both systems could be found to have serious security problems; who knows what the outcome of their discovery & exploitation would be? I know at least one group of people who believe they have a good line on a serious security problem in Mondex. If they have the specs they are under an NDA. If you know people who know a problem tell them to get in touch with Tim Jones, they are very keen to get the best security possible. I'm not sure that the conventional "publish everything" dogma of cypher types is valid. I don't think they are relying on security through obscurity, they simply want it in addition. Mondex is designed with two security schemes to be exchanged at overlapping four year intervals. > Even if the Mondex hardware were given away for free, think how much fun it is for the average user to add a new piece of hardware to their machines... ever install a sound card and CD-ROM drive on a PC? I remember reading something like 20% of all "multimedia" kits were returned, largely due to user install problems. If there is a competing method that costs the same and _doesn't_ require the hardware, people will tend go with this. They need it to be plug 'n play. I expect this to happen. > In my conversations with state and federal regulators, it is clear that it _is_ possible to issue spender-anonymous e-cash. If you ask them, "Hey, can I create fully anonymous digital cash?", they go apeshit, but if you explain that the money uses existing (auditable) channels going in, and existing (auditable) channels going out, and that only spenders are anonymous, they relax considerably. They may change their minds later, but we're about to get an existence proof. All I know is that at the mention of DigiCash bankers start muttering Regulation E. > It's not clear that _either_ system is going to win completely in the next 10+ years. Although there's been considerable shakeout in the last ten years, there is still a huge variety of non-electronic payment methods -- how can you be so sure that Mondex will win over Digicash, and that they won't co-exist like, say, money orders, currency and cashier's checks (three instruments with both similar and dissimilar attirbutes)? Quite probable, except that Mondex is a very credible scheme with very large and very established names behind it. I haven't heard of Mark Twain bank. I don't say that this predetermines the outcome, just that there are reasons why one might have an advantage. Phill H-B From bounce-ecm@ai.mit.edu Mon Oct 23 22:30:04 1995 Return-Path: Received: by life.ai.mit.edu (4.1/AI-4.10) for /com/mailer/majordomo-wrapper archive2.pl -a -m -f /com/archive/ecm/ecm.archive id AA18758; Mon, 23 Oct 95 22:30:04 EDT Received: from zork.tiac.net by life.ai.mit.edu (4.1/AI-4.10) for /com/mailer/majordomo-wrapper resend -l ecm -h ai.mit.edu -s -r ecm ecm-outgoing id AA18508; Mon, 23 Oct 95 22:24:50 EDT Received: from [199.0.65.105] (FlyingCloud.tiac.net [199.0.65.105]) by zork.tiac.net (8.6.9/8.6.6.Beta9) with SMTP id WAA20466; Mon, 23 Oct 1995 22:11:39 -0400 X-Sender: rah@tiac.net Message-Id: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Date: Mon, 23 Oct 1995 22:10:59 -0400 To: www-buyinfo@allegra.att.com, ecm@ai.mit.edu From: rah@shipwright.com (Robert Hettinga) Subject: Mark Twain Bank (was: Anonymity: A Modest Proposal) Sender: bounce-ecm@ai.mit.edu Precedence: bulk Reply-To: rah@shipwright.com (Robert Hettinga) --- begin forwarded text X-Sender: cman@mail.communities.com Mime-Version: 1.0 Date: Mon, 23 Oct 1995 18:03:38 -0800 To: (Recipient list suppressed) From: cman@communities.com (Douglas Barnes) Subject: Mark Twain Bank (was: Anonymity: A Modest Proposal) Sender: owner-cypherpunks@toad.com Precedence: bulk First of all, those who have looked over the MT Bank stuff all know that they are clearly off to a very shaky start. I know of three guys that could have done a _much_ more professional job, almost a year ago. Unfortunately we were rejected by Chaum as insufficiently respectable. So now we get a service that is lame, confusing and expensive -- at least at the bank end. Chaum apparently continues to suffer from the belief that he needs a real bank to issue e-cash. Well, MT Bank is a real bank, but they have managed to violate at least one major Federal Reserve requirement (accounts in the ECash mint are clearly demand deposit accounts -- it would have been trivial to define them differently but somebody apparently wasn't thinking.) A technically-oriented NBFI could have done a much better job, without a lot of the "real bank" baggage, such as minimum deposits ($250, not $2,500, but still pretty steep for someone wanting to spend $.10 on something.) My understanding is that the _bank account_ is FDIC insured, but not the ECash. I could be wrong -- their materials are extremely confusing and hard to follow. As one of my co-workers said today, "It will be interesting to sit back and watch them take regulatory mortar fire." Indeed. I'm really hoping that they pull their act together -- I've already sent in my account application -- but things look really grim at the moment. There are certainly a lot of projects list members are working on that would be greatly enhanced by functioning, popular e-cash. I encourage everyone to give them lots of helpful feedback so that they can turn this around. On another note, I'm hoping that some of you will also bite the bullet, get accounts, and join me attempting to win valuable prizes in Sameer's "Hack Digicash" promotion. I'd rather see one of us find holes in this than see the whole thing melt into the ground. This extremely unprofessional, bungled launch does, I admit, make Mondex (with scads of beautiful marketing literature) look better all the time, although based on some conversations on Sunday, it appears that they may have _extremely serious_ architectural security problems. We'll see how things play out. Later, Doug > With the release of digicash I hope that we can soon make this >stuff for-pay and much of the spam problem will be fixed. (Not all of >it, of course.) > (I am rather hesitatnt to setup an account with Mark Twain >though.. $2,500 min balance and not FDIC insured?) --- end forwarded text ----------------- Robert Hettinga (rah@shipwright.com) Shipwright Development Corporation, 44 Farquhar Street, Boston, MA 02131 USA (617) 323-7923 "Reality is not optional." --Thomas Sowell >>>>Phree Phil: Email: zldf@clark.net http://www.netresponse.com/zldf <<<<< From bounce-ecm@ai.mit.edu Tue Oct 24 12:25:44 1995 Return-Path: Received: by life.ai.mit.edu (4.1/AI-4.10) for /com/mailer/majordomo-wrapper archive2.pl -a -m -f /com/archive/ecm/ecm.archive id AA19422; Tue, 24 Oct 95 12:25:44 EDT Received: from mailgate.isltd.insignia.com by life.ai.mit.edu (4.1/AI-4.10) for /com/mailer/majordomo-wrapper resend -l ecm -h ai.mit.edu -s -r ecm ecm-outgoing id AA19401; Tue, 24 Oct 95 12:25:27 EDT X-Address: Insignia Solutions plc., High Wycombe, Bucks, HP11 1JU, UK X-Telephone: +44 1494 459426 X-Fax: +44 1494 459720 Received: from aston.isltd.insignia.com.isltd.insignia.com (aston.isltd.insignia.com) by mailgate.isltd.insignia.com (5.65c8/UK-2.1.ISL) with SMTP id AA05004; Tue, 24 Oct 1995 17:25:10 +0100 From: Mark Grant Date: Tue, 24 Oct 95 17:25:09 BST Message-Id: <25056.9510241625@aston.isltd.insignia.com.isltd.insignia.com> Subject: Re: (cpx) Mondex vs. Digicash (was: Godzilla vs. Mothra) To: ecm@ai.mit.edu Sender: bounce-ecm@ai.mit.edu Precedence: bulk Reply-To: Mark Grant hallam@w3.org said : > The avbilability in the US I don't consider as meaning much one way or > the other. Mondex is avaliable in Swindon in the UK, a very large and very > serious real world trial. However, being a Net payment system, availability of DigiCash accounts in the US means they are also available worldwide. Were it not for the high monthly charge, I'd open an account with them tomorrow. I may do anyway. > More importantly Mondex has Wells Fargo Bank behind it and NatWest and HKSB, > these are major league players with very tight coupling, cross ownership of > subsidiaries etc. As someone who's had a NatWest account for a decade, this does not give me warm fuzzies ;-).. > DigiCash will be limited to the Internet, Mondex is genuine cash, it allows > offline purse to purse transactions. >From the comments posted to the list in the past (I'm trying to find them on the WWW archive, but it's been whirring away for ten minutes and the page hasn't come up yet), Mondex is nothing like cash. It was claimed to keep a record of all transactions to upload to the bank each time it's used in an ATM (or however you fill it up), which cash doesn't do... In any case, for real world transactions I have real cash. > I'm not sure that the conventional "publish everything" dogma of cypher types is > valid. I don't think they are relying on security through obscurity, they simply > want it in addition. Mondex is designed with two security schemes to be > exchanged at overlapping four year intervals. If it's secure, why keep it secret ? If they don't publish the specs, then there's no way to verify security, and those of us who want a secure and anonymous system won't use it. We know that the fundamental algorithms in ecash are secure and anonymous, the only security holes (if any) would be in the implementation. Of course, having said that, I'd still be happier if DigiCash would publish the specs for their messages so that I could verify that it really does what it claims to. > Quite probable, except that Mondex is a very credible scheme with very large and > very established names behind it. If what I've been told is true, I wouldn't touch it with a bargepole. Mark From bounce-ecm@ai.mit.edu Tue Oct 24 18:34:35 1995 Return-Path: Received: by life.ai.mit.edu (4.1/AI-4.10) for /com/mailer/majordomo-wrapper archive2.pl -a -m -f /com/archive/ecm/ecm.archive id AA13694; Tue, 24 Oct 95 18:34:35 EDT Received: from infinity.c2.org by life.ai.mit.edu (4.1/AI-4.10) for /com/mailer/majordomo-wrapper resend -l ecm -h ai.mit.edu -s -r ecm ecm-outgoing id AA13685; Tue, 24 Oct 95 18:34:21 EDT Received: (from nobody@localhost) by infinity.c2.org (8.7.1/8.6.9) id PAA00323; Tue, 24 Oct 1995 15:29:04 -0700 (PDT) Community ConneXion: Privacy & Community: Date: Tue, 24 Oct 1995 15:29:04 -0700 (PDT) Message-Id: <199510242229.PAA00323@infinity.c2.org> To: ecm@ai.mit.edu Cc: ecash-market@unicorn.com From: ecash-market@unicorn.com Subject: New sell offer Sender: bounce-ecm@ai.mit.edu Precedence: bulk Reply-To: ecash-market@unicorn.com E=300 RATE(per c$100)=US$8.00 SELL-OFFER 1995-09-24 15:29 13 EUID=http://www.c2.org/~mark/ecash/ecash.html From bounce-ecm@ai.mit.edu Wed Oct 25 05:28:11 1995 Return-Path: Received: by life.ai.mit.edu (4.1/AI-4.10) for /com/mailer/majordomo-wrapper archive2.pl -a -m -f /com/archive/ecm/ecm.archive id AA07485; Wed, 25 Oct 95 05:28:11 EDT Received: from zork.tiac.net by life.ai.mit.edu (4.1/AI-4.10) for /com/mailer/majordomo-wrapper resend -l ecm -h ai.mit.edu -s -r ecm ecm-outgoing id AA07478; Wed, 25 Oct 95 05:28:07 EDT Received: from [199.0.65.105] (FlyingCloud.tiac.net [199.0.65.105]) by zork.tiac.net (8.6.9/8.6.6.Beta9) with SMTP id FAA22334; Wed, 25 Oct 1995 05:31:15 -0400 X-Sender: rah@tiac.net Message-Id: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Date: Wed, 25 Oct 1995 05:28:05 -0400 To: www-buyinfo@allegra.att.com, ecm@ai.mit.edu From: rah@shipwright.com (Robert Hettinga) Subject: (cpx) Re: Mark Twain Bank (was: Anonymity: A Modest Proposal) Sender: bounce-ecm@ai.mit.edu Precedence: bulk Reply-To: rah@shipwright.com (Robert Hettinga) --- begin forwarded text From: mpd@netcom.com (Mike Duvos) Subject: Re: Mark Twain Bank (was: Anonymity: A Modest Proposal) To: cypherpunks@toad.com Date: Tue, 24 Oct 1995 22:51:29 -0700 (PDT) Mime-Version: 1.0 Sender: owner-cypherpunks@toad.com Precedence: bulk Someone writes: >My >understanding is that the _bank account_ is FDIC insured, but not >the ECash. I could be wrong -- their materials are extremely confusing >and hard to follow. I read the entire lengthy contract and found quite a few things which appear to be designed to cover the bank's posterior. 1. Both parties stipulate that their relationship is a business relationship and not a fiduciary relationship. 2. Your account is not FDIC insured. 3. The bank accepts no liability for anything going wrong, although it may, at its sole option, attempt to make ammends. 4. Parties agree to wave a jury trial. 5. Parties agree to binding arbitration. 6. General waffling to the effect that the tiny fees collected imply an equally tiny responsiblity and potential liability on the part of the bank. Now most of this language also appears in the fine print of the First Virtual agreement, so it is not like you have an option of trading on the Internet under the rules which govern your ordinary checking account. One wonders whether signing away all responsibilty on the part of the bank is going to be the standard for using digital money on the Internet, or whether consumers will demand protection when using these new services. One has to be careful that when new technology replaces old, the privacy protection which applied to the old also applies to the new. Good examples of this in the past are the ways in which the rights you have to the privacy of paper mail generally fail to be extended to Email, and of course "regulation E", which exempted bank accounts which were capable of Electronic Funds Transfer from a great deal of the protection which used to govern users of ordinary checking accounts. On the brighter side, Dr. Chaum's success in convincing someone to back DigiCash with actual US dollars certainly makes advances in breaking public key cryptography worth a great more than the tiny prizes currently offered by RSADSI. It will be interesting to see how this all works out in the next few months. Arjen Lenstra is planning on factoring RSA-130 on the Web for a high performance computing conference later this year. This should lead to some very robust estimates for the amount of computing power needed for GNFS to break 512 bit PGP keys. Does anyone know the details of the DigiCash protocol, or how much computing power it would take someone to make counterfeit coins? -- Mike Duvos $ PGP 2.6 Public Key available $ mpd@netcom.com $ via Finger. $ --- end forwarded text ----------------- Robert Hettinga (rah@shipwright.com) Shipwright Development Corporation, 44 Farquhar Street, Boston, MA 02131 USA (617) 323-7923 "Reality is not optional." --Thomas Sowell >>>>Phree Phil: Email: zldf@clark.net http://www.netresponse.com/zldf <<<<< From bounce-ecm@ai.mit.edu Wed Oct 25 10:27:00 1995 Return-Path: Received: by life.ai.mit.edu (4.1/AI-4.10) for /com/mailer/majordomo-wrapper archive2.pl -a -m -f /com/archive/ecm/ecm.archive id AA18487; Wed, 25 Oct 95 10:27:00 EDT Received: from zork.tiac.net by life.ai.mit.edu (4.1/AI-4.10) for /com/mailer/majordomo-wrapper resend -l ecm -h ai.mit.edu -s -r ecm ecm-outgoing id AA18475; Wed, 25 Oct 95 10:26:50 EDT Received: from [199.0.65.105] (FlyingCloud.tiac.net [199.0.65.105]) by zork.tiac.net (8.6.9/8.6.6.Beta9) with SMTP id KAA00810; Wed, 25 Oct 1995 10:26:46 -0400 X-Sender: rah@tiac.net Message-Id: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Date: Wed, 25 Oct 1995 10:26:47 -0400 To: bsdc@ai.mit.edu, ecm@ai.mit.edu, www-buyinfo@allegra.att.com, cypherpunks@toad.com From: rah@shipwright.com (Robert Hettinga) Subject: BSDC: Designing Systems for Electronic Commerce Sender: bounce-ecm@ai.mit.edu Precedence: bulk Reply-To: rah@shipwright.com (Robert Hettinga) -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- The Boston Society for Digital Commerce Presents Win Treese Open Market, Inc. Designing Systems for Electronic Commerce Tuesday, November 7, 1995 12 - 2 PM The Downtown Harvard Club of Boston One Federal Street, Boston, MA Win Treese is Director of Security and Advanced Technology for Open Market, Inc., a startup company building systems and software for electronic commerce on open networks. Before joining Open Market, he was a member of the research staff at the Cambridge Research Laboratory of Digital Equipment Corporation, where he worked on a variety of projects, including the design and implementation of Digital's Internet firewall system and the AudioFile network audio system. Win says: >"Electronic commerce" is a short name for a big topic. In this talk I >will describe Open Market's Transaction Management System and other >components that can be used in many different applications, such as >ordering of retail products for delivery, subscription access to >information, "pay-per-page" purchasing of information, and others. In >addition to payment, I will discuss other issues that arise in >commerce, such as customer service and content management. This meeting of the Boston Society for Digital Commerce will be held on Tuesday, November 7, 1995 from 12pm - 2pm at the Downtown Branch of the Harvard Club of Boston, One Federal Street. The price for lunch is $27.50. This price includes lunch, room rental, and the speaker's lunch. ;-). The Harvard Club *does* have a jacket and tie dress code. We need to receive a company check, or money order, (or if we *really* know you, a personal check) payable to "The Harvard Club of Boston", by Saturday, November 4 (that's one week from this Saturday), or you won't be on the list for lunch. Checks payable to anyone else but The Harvard Club of Boston will have to be sent back. Checks should be sent to Robert Hettinga, c/o The Shipwright Development Corporation, 44 Farquhar Street, Boston, Massachusetts, 02131. Again, they must be made payable to "The Harvard Club of Boston". If anyone has questions, or has a problem with these arrangements (We've had to work with a few glacial A/P departments ourselves, for instance), please let us know via e-mail, and we'll see if we can work something out. November's speaker will be Art Hutchinson of Northeast Consulting Resources, Inc. We are actively searching for future speakers. If you are in Boston on the first Tuesday of the month, and you would like to make a presentation to the Society, please send e-mail to the BSDC Program Commmittee care of Robert Hettinga, rah@shipwright.com . For more information about the Boston Society for Digital Commerce, send "info bsdc" in the body of a message to majordomo@ai.mit.edu . If you want to subscribe to the BSDC e-mail list, send "subscribe bsdc" in the body of a message to majordomo@ai.mit.edu . Looking forward to seeing you there! Cheers, Bob Hettinga Interim Moderator, The Boston Society for Digital Commerce -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: 2.6.2 iQCVAwUBMI5Iw/gyLN8bw6ZVAQF3FQP+LxoCbP4AoijIMobOVE1PzX066WrmvwMb pSaSpBP4F7/XJ0NP2EdKDZw24xpqxrvKm6j+FDzC3dDWcR3zlZPeEjvIGSFpNDW4 QJhGDlBfDo8LPAp9ua28CwxDSeyFmUZcMIjh7cgVOjCuG9Gegkn0jO3MihtrDb7U yki9gTYDaNw= =2VH9 -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- ----------------- Robert Hettinga (rah@shipwright.com) Shipwright Development Corporation, 44 Farquhar Street, Boston, MA 02131 USA (617) 323-7923 "Reality is not optional." --Thomas Sowell >>>>Phree Phil: Email: zldf@clark.net http://www.netresponse.com/zldf <<<<< From bounce-ecm@ai.mit.edu Sat Oct 28 16:11:35 1995 Return-Path: Received: by life.ai.mit.edu (4.1/AI-4.10) for /com/mailer/majordomo-wrapper archive2.pl -a -m -f /com/archive/ecm/ecm.archive id AA07295; Sat, 28 Oct 95 16:11:35 EDT Received: from infinity.c2.org by life.ai.mit.edu (4.1/AI-4.10) for /com/mailer/majordomo-wrapper resend -l ecm -h ai.mit.edu -s -r ecm ecm-outgoing id AA07287; Sat, 28 Oct 95 16:11:26 EDT Received: (from nobody@localhost) by infinity.c2.org (8.7.1/8.6.9) id NAA25165; Sat, 28 Oct 1995 13:06:15 -0700 (PDT) Community ConneXion: Privacy & Community: Date: Sat, 28 Oct 1995 13:06:15 -0700 (PDT) Message-Id: <199510282006.NAA25165@infinity.c2.org> To: ecm@ai.mit.edu Cc: ecash-market@unicorn.com From: ecash-market@unicorn.com Subject: New buy offer Sender: bounce-ecm@ai.mit.edu Precedence: bulk Reply-To: ecash-market@unicorn.com E=5000 RATE(per c$100)=US$1 BUY-OFFER 1995-09-28 13:06 14 EUID=http://www.c2.org/~mark/ecash/ecash.html From bounce-ecm@ai.mit.edu Sat Oct 28 16:28:33 1995 Return-Path: Received: by life.ai.mit.edu (4.1/AI-4.10) for /com/mailer/majordomo-wrapper archive2.pl -a -m -f /com/archive/ecm/ecm.archive id AA08394; Sat, 28 Oct 95 16:28:33 EDT Received: from mailhost.tue.nl by life.ai.mit.edu (4.1/AI-4.10) for /com/mailer/majordomo-wrapper resend -l ecm -h ai.mit.edu -s -r ecm ecm-outgoing id AA08387; Sat, 28 Oct 95 16:28:27 EDT Received: from popserver.tue.nl [131.155.2.4] by mailhost.tue.nl (8.7) for id VAA12936 (ESMTP). Sat, 28 Oct 1995 21:28:23 +0100 (MET) Received: from annex1s29.urc.tue.nl [131.155.12.39] by popserver.tue.nl (8.7) for id VAA09848 (SMTP). Sat, 28 Oct 1995 21:30:22 +0100 Message-Id: <199510282030.VAA09848@popserver.tue.nl> X-Sender: s324354@popserver.tue.nl X-Mailer: Windows Eudora Version 1.4.3 Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Date: Sat, 28 Oct 1995 21:29:50 +0200 To: ecm@ai.mit.edu From: J.F.H.v.Agt@stud.tue.nl (Jeroen van Agt) Subject: NEW service: Cheap advertisement Sender: bounce-ecm@ai.mit.edu Precedence: bulk Reply-To: J.F.H.v.Agt@stud.tue.nl (Jeroen van Agt) I just started a new service: Sponsoring and Advertising Why sponsoring My site is visited everyday by more than 5000 people and this number is still growing. Wouldn't it be NICE to have an ad on this site, which links to your own site to increase your number of visitors. The top 50 sponsors will have a link to their homepage. The top 5 sponsors have there own ad with name, logo, description and link to their site. The top 1 sponsor will also be placed on the main homepage So interested in increasing the your number of visitors? check: http://www.stack.urc.tue.nl/~jeroenag/ And take a look at the sponsoring (advertisement) section go to: sponsor section -other sponsors - about sponsoring Then can create your own automatic advertisement, test it and pay ecash and watch the ad to be placed automatically on the main/sponsor page. Just started this service, so the sponsoring price for TOP sponsor is very low. Have fun............. Jeroen van Agt ------------------------------------------------ E-Mail: J.F.H.v.Agt@stud.tue.nl -----BEGIN PGP PUBLIC KEY BLOCK----- Version: 2.6.2i mQBtAzB4VrgAAAEDAN09JAkGpujkLvbVG6kn5lhvQxzbXy3KPzW74O+NrVDxHwYO JyJYkEo+HbnjdZacy1ZY1DoFG7/G5m0xC1OxU+oUxAiAm2mll9Rlc0ByfTgXMiDc r9M9tjemUWMTIOg9+QAFEbQoSmVyb2VuIHZhbiBBZ3QgPEouRi5ILnYuQWd0QHN0 dWQudHVlLm5sPg== =nniN -----END PGP PUBLIC KEY BLOCK----- From bounce-ecm@ai.mit.edu Tue Oct 31 22:21:37 1995 Return-Path: Received: by life.ai.mit.edu (4.1/AI-4.10) for /com/mailer/majordomo-wrapper archive2.pl -a -m -f /com/archive/ecm/ecm.archive id AA12346; Tue, 31 Oct 95 22:21:37 EST Received: from zork.tiac.net by life.ai.mit.edu (4.1/AI-4.10) for /com/mailer/majordomo-wrapper resend -l ecm -h ai.mit.edu -s -r ecm ecm-outgoing id AA12332; Tue, 31 Oct 95 22:21:32 EST Received: from [199.0.65.105] (FlyingCloud.tiac.net [199.0.65.105]) by zork.tiac.net (8.6.9/8.6.6.Beta9) with SMTP id WAA11751; Tue, 31 Oct 1995 22:21:26 -0500 X-Sender: rah@tiac.net Message-Id: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Date: Tue, 31 Oct 1995 22:21:27 -0500 To: cypherpunks@toad.com, www-buyinfo@allegra.att.com, ecm@ai.mit.edu From: rah@shipwright.com (Robert Hettinga) Subject: Internet World Boston Sender: bounce-ecm@ai.mit.edu Precedence: bulk Reply-To: rah@shipwright.com (Robert Hettinga) David Fox has me on a panel discussion he's leading tomorrow (November 1) at Internet World in Boston in the Harborview Ballroom from 10:15 to 12:30. Also on the panel will be someone each from First Virtual, Open Market, and CheckFree, all of whom will be demo-ing their latest stuff. This promises to be interesting, and it would also be a great opportunity for me to actually meet some people I only read in e-mail. If you're around, I hope to see you there! Cheers, Bob Hettinga ----------------- Robert Hettinga (rah@shipwright.com) Shipwright Development Corporation, 44 Farquhar Street, Boston, MA 02131 USA (617) 323-7923 "Reality is not optional." --Thomas Sowell >>>>Phree Phil: Email: zldf@clark.net http://www.netresponse.com/zldf <<<<<