# Tag Info

7

You are probably looking for what is called "anonymous credentials". An anonymous credentials system relates three types of parties: authorities, users, and verifiers. An authority (Alice) can issue a credential to a user (Bob), that certifies that the user satisfies some property (in your case, that would be "is trusted"). Credentials are unforgeable. ...

2

It may be an interesting avenue to explore. I've read the highlight reel of the digital cash literature but I do not know it well enough to know how well these issues have been addressed. A few things to consider for #2: In a quick read of Lucre, it seems that the payee does no verification before passing the coin onto the mint. It seems, if the mint has ...

1

What you are describing is an anonymous credential system. There are two different ways to go about making these and two actually systems that use those techniuqes. Microsoft's U-prove and IBM's Idemix. If you're interested in smart card usage, you probably prefer U-prove as it tends to work better with smart cards. Its described in a by its original ...

1

If Bob and Charlie will share a secret, then it information-theoretic privacy might be possible, otherwise the best that can be hoped for is computational anonymity. I haven't come up up with any way to achieve information-theoretic privacy when Bob and Charlie share a secret, so I will only be addressing computational privacy. I assume that Bob can ...

1

If you can find such an efficiently computable function (other than the trivial solution $\hat{e}( x, y ) = 1\ \$ for all $x$, $y$), then you have shown that the decisional Diffie-Hellman problem is easy. That is, given $g$, $g^a$, $g^b$, $g^c$, you can check whether $$ab = c$$ simply by testing: $$\hat{e}( g^a, g^b ) = \hat{e}( g, g^c)$$ The ...

Only top voted, non community-wiki answers of a minimum length are eligible