Re: [freehaven-dev] Micali's Exchange protocol

[Michael J Freedman <mfreed@MIT.EDU>]

Right.  This is exactly what I mean: the fair exchance problem boils
down to that "just another ack and we'll verifier...ad infinitum."

> the buddy system should mostly track when a server is bad, and we can
> have 3 buddies so there should be 2 in agreement....

I'd like to hear what David has re: notes from after I had to
leave.  I thought we were going back in the direction of a shepherd.

If not, how are we handling the potential man-in-the-middle attack
by the server ('S_buddy') on which the buddy resolves, as it can spoof
both to and from the buddy.  As the buddy share itself has no processing
power, we lose trusted validation, as S_buddy might or might not be
trusted in any situation. 

Anyway, I'll just wait to hear what (if anything) was finally resolved,
--mike