Re: [freehaven-dev] POKs for mix accountability transcript

[Roger Dingledine <arma@mit.edu>]

On Sat, Jan 06, 2001 at 07:05:07AM +0000, David Hopwood wrote:
> Actually I think I've been looking at this the wrong way. The leakage
> of information is due to the fact that M and N_{j+1} can be linked with
> Alice. That can be fixed by allowing Alice to publish the accusation
> that N_j failed anonymously. Note that (C, M, N_j, N_{j+1}) is already

My problem with this is the chicken-and-egg problem. We're trying to build
a fundamental building block of anonymous communication here.  If Alice
has a channel for anonymously publishing her accusation in a robust way,
why doesn't she just use that to talk to Bob and be done with it?

(I guess a possible answer might be "because this one can only talk
to mixnet nodes", but that still seems more complicated than it's
worth. Hmm.)
 
> To implement this, we need to be able to give nodes an instruction
> to publish a message on the ledger (i.e. all types of message, not
> just "To N_i: M"). Alice also needs to be able to determine which node

what other types of messages are there?

thanks,
--roger