DOCSLIB.ORG

On the Origins and Variations of Blockchain Technologies

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
On the Origins and Variations of Blockchain Technologies REAL-WORLD CRYPTO Editors: Peter Gutmann, [email protected] | David Naccache, [email protected] | Charles C. Palmer, [email protected] On the Origins and Variations of Blockchain Technologies Alan T. Sherman, Farid Javani, Haibin Zhang, and Enis Golaszewski | University of Maryland, Baltimore County e explore the origins of help people understand where and controls who may update state Wblockchain technologies blockchains came from, whether and issue transactions. A private to better understand the enduring they are important, and if they will blockchain is a permissioned block- needs they address. We identify the persist. (For a complete list of refer- chain controlled by one organiza- five key elements of a blockchain, ences, see A. Sherman et al.)1 tion. A consortium blockchain is show the embodiments of these a permissioned blockchain involv- elements, and examine how these Elements of Blockchains ing a group of organizations. In a elements come together to yield Blockchains provide a mechanism permissionless blockchain, anyone important properties in selected through which mutually distrustful may potentially append new blocks, systems. To facilitate comparing the remote parties (nodes) can reach with the consensus policy (e.g., a many variations of blockchains, we consensus on the state of a ledger majority of participants) determin- also describe the four crucial roles of information. To trace the origins ing which continuation is valid. of common blockchain participants. of these technologies, we start by Blockchains achieve consensus Our historical exploration highlights identifying their essential elements and control (and, in particular, the 1979 work of David Chaum, informally. A blockchain is a dis- prevent double spending) in part whose vault system embodies many tributed ledger comprising blocks through applying protocols and of the elements of blockchains. (records) of information, includ- establishing high costs (both eco- ing information about transac- nomic and computational) to modify Understanding tions between two or more parties. the ledger. Typically, permissioned Blockchains The blocks are cryptographically systems run faster than permission- With myriad blockchain distrib- linked to create an immutable led- less systems do because their control uted ledger systems in existence, ger. Nodes may append informa- and consensus strategies depend on more than 550 associated pat- tion to the ledger through invoking faster fault-tolerant protocols3 rather ent applications under review, and transactions. An access policy deter- than on time-consuming crypto- much associated hype, it can be mines who may read the informa- graphic proofs of work (PoWs), and difficult to make sense of these tion. A control policy determines they usually involve fewer nodes. systems, their properties, and how who may participate in the evolu- Gencer et al. show that permission- they compare. Through exploring tion of the blockchain and how new less blockchains (such as Bitcoin the origins of these technologies, blocks may potentially be appended and Ethereum) are much more cen- including David Chaum’s 1979 vault to the blockchain. A consensus policy tralized than many people assume: system, we provide insights and a determines which state of the block- 20 mining pools control 90% of the clear and useful way to think about chain is valid, resolving disputes computing power. blockchains. Our historical perspec- should conflicting possible continu- Some blockchains additionally tive distills important ideas, identi- ations appear. support the idea of smart contracts, fies enduring needs, and shows how As explained by Cachin and which execute terms of agreements changing technologies can satisfy Vukolic,2 a range of control policies between parties, possibly without those needs. This perspective will is possible, including permissioned, human intervention. These agree- consortium, private, and permis- ments might be embodied as arbi- Digital Object Identifier 10.1109/MSEC.2019.2893730 sionless blockchains. In a permis- trary computer programs including Date of publication: 20 March 2019 sioned blockchain, a body identifies conditional statements. 72 January/February 2019 Copublished by the IEEE Computer and Reliability Societies 1540-7993/19©2019IEEE Embodiments of PoW for both mining and achiev­­ and private transaction computa- the Elements ing consensus. tions that protects individual pri- Although the seminal paper on Bit- PoW aims, in part, to defend vacy through physical security. coin appeared in 2008 (with the against Sybil attacks, in which adver- The building blocks of this system mysterious author Satoshi Naka- saries attempt to forge multiple include physically secure vaults, moto),4 most of the underlying identities and use those forged iden- existing cryptographic primi- technological ideas had arisen many tities to influence the consensus pro- tives (symmetric and asymmetric years earlier. A blockchain is a type cess. With PoW, however, a node’s encryption, cryptographic hash of distributed database, an idea that influence on the consensus process functions, and digital signatures), goes back to at least the 1970s (e.g., is proportional to its computational and a new primitive introduced by Wong11). More generally, the idea of power: forging multiple identities Chaum—threshold secret sharing.8 record keeping goes back millennia, that share the adversary’s given com- Chaum’s 1982 work went largely including to ancient Mesopotamia. putational power does not help. To unnoticed, apparently because he Kanare describes proper methods adapt to varying amounts of avail- never made any effort to publish it for scientific logging, including the able computational resources, PoW in a conference or journal, instead idea of preserving all transaction systems dynamically throttle the pursuing different approaches to records, in addition to the history difficulty of the PoW problem to achieving individual privacy. of any modifications to the collected achieve a certain target rate at which In Chaum’s system, each vault data—ideas that are found in many the problems are solved. signs, records, and broadcasts each systems (e.g., Hyperledger Fabric). Permissioned blockchains can be transaction it processes. Chaum The idea of immutably chaining modeled using the concept of (Byz- states, “Because the aggregate blocks of information with a cryp- antine fault-tolerant) state machine in cludes COMPRESSED_HIS- tographic hash function appears replication, a notion proposed in TORY, the [cryptographic] check- in the 1979 dissertation of Ralph 1978 by Lamport and, later, con- sum is actually ‘chained’ through the Merkle at Stanford, in which Merkle cisely formalized by Schneider. entire history of consensus states.”9 explains how information can be State machine replication specifies He further says, “Nodes remember linked in a tree structure now known what are the transactions and in and will provide all messages they as a Merkle hash tree. A linear chain what order they are processed, even have output—each vault saves all it is a special case of a tree, and a tree in the presence of (Byzantine) faults has signed, up to some limit, and will provides a more efficient way of and unreliable communications.3 supply any saved thing on request; chaining information than does a Thereby, to achieve a strong form only dead vaults can cause loss of linear chain. Subsequently, in 1990, of transaction consensus, many recently signed things.”9 Haber and Stornetta applied these permissioned systems build on the Chaum’s system embodies a ideas to time-stamp documents, cre- ideas from the 1998 Paxos protocol mechanism for achieving member- ating the company Surety in 1994. of Lamport7 (which deals only ship consistency: “Among other These prior works, however, do not with crash failures) and from the things, the algorithms must provide a include other elements and tech- 2002 Practical Byzantine Fault kind of synchronization and agree- niques of blockchain. Tolerance protocol of Castro and ment among nodes about allowing To prevent an adversary from Liskov. Nakamoto observed that new nodes into the network, remov- unduly influencing the consen- the permissionless Bitcoin system ing nodes from the network, and the sus process, many permissionless realizes Byzantine agreement in status of nodes once in the network.”9 systems require that new blocks open networks. The system also embodies a weak include a proof of computational Arguably, many of the elements form of transaction consensus, albeit work. Nakamoto’s paper cites Back’s5 of blockchains are embodied in vaguely described and apparently 2002 effective construction from David Chaum’s 1979 vault system,8 not supporting concurrent client re­­ Hashcash. In 1992, Dwork and described in his 1982 dissertation9 quests: “If the output of one partic- Naor proposed proof of compu- at Berkeley, including detailed ular processor module is used as the tation to combat junk mail. The specifications. Chaum describes output for the entire vault, the other idea and a construction underly- the design of a distributed com- processors must be able to compare ing PoW, however, may be seen in puter system that can be estab- their output to its output, and have an initial form in 1974 in Merkle’s lished, maintained, and trusted by time to stop the output on its way puzzles,6 which Merkle proposed mutually suspicious groups. It is a through the isolation devices.”9 The to implement public-key cryptog- public record-keeping
Load more

Recommended publications
  • A Technical Overview of Digital Credentials
    A Technical Overview of Digital Credentials Dr. Stefan Brands Credentica [email protected] February 20, 2002 Abstract Applications that involve the electronic transfer of credentials, value tokens, profiles, and other sensitive information are quickly gaining momentum. Traditional attempts to introduce electronic authentication, such as PKI and biometric verification, expose organizations to po- tentially unlimited liability, lead to consumer fear, and stifle the adoption of new systems. To overcome these barriers, innovative solutions are needed that address the entire spectrum of security and privacy interests for all parties involved. This paper is a technical overview of Digital Credentials. Digital Credentials are the digital equivalent of paper documents, plastic tokens, and other tangible objects issued by trusted parties. At the same time, they are much more powerful than their physical counterparts. For example, individuals can selectively disclose properties of the data fields in their Digital Credentials while hiding any other information. Digital Credentials also provide much greater security. As a result, they can be used to securely implement objects that traditionally are made identifiable in order to deal with certain kinds of fraud. Examples are diplomas, work permits, access cards, and drivers’ licenses. 1 Introduction Around the world, influential organizations are rushing to provide individuals with digital identity certificates that will be the sole means of participating in their systems. Among the front-runners are telecommunication organizations, health care providers, mobile service providers, financial institutions, and state and federal governments. A digital identity certificate is just a sequence of zeros and ones, and so it can be transferred electronically and can be verified with 100 percent accuracy by computers.
    [Show full text]
  • Crush Crypto Educational Series
    The History of Digital Currency Educational Series November 26, 2018 Digital Currency Before Bitcoin • The creation of Bitcoin in 2009 marked the birth of the first digital currency to achieve widespread adoption across the globe. However, the concept of a secure digital currency has been around since the 1980s. • Previous attempts that inspired Satoshi Nakamoto’s creation of Bitcoin include: • DigiCash • Bit Gold • Hashcash • B-money For additional resources, please visit www.CrushCrypto.com. 2 Copyright © Crush Crypto. All Rights Reserved. DigiCash • Computer scientist David Chaum released the paper Blind Signatures for Untraceable Payments (1982) in which he outlined an alternative to the electronic transactions hitting retail stores at the time. His paper is considered one of the first proposals of digital currency in history. • He continued working on his proposal and eventually launched a company called DigiCash in 1990 to commercialize the ideas in his research. In 1994 the company put forth their first electronic cash transaction over the internet. For additional resources, please visit www.CrushCrypto.com. 3 Copyright © Crush Crypto. All Rights Reserved. DigiCash (continued) • DigiCash transactions were unique for the time considering their use of protocols like blind signatures and public key cryptography to enable anonymity. As a result, third parties were prevented from accessing personal information through the online transactions. • Despite the novel technology, DigiCash was not profitable as a company and filed a chapter 11 bankruptcy in 1998 before being sold for assets in 2002. • Chaum thought that DigiCash entered the market before e-commerce was fully integrated with the internet and that lead to a chicken-and-egg problem.
    [Show full text]
  • Achieving Electronic Privacy a Cryptographicinvention Known As a Blind Signature Permits Numbers to Serve As Electronic Cash Or to Replace Conventional Identification
    Achieving Electronic Privacy A cryptographic invention known as a blind signature permits numbers to serve as electronic cash or to replace conventional identification. The author hopes it may return control of personal information to the individual by David Chaum very time you make a telephone murderers have tracked down their tar­ cessors capable of carrying out the nec­ call, purchase goods using a cred­ gets by consulting government-main­ essary algorithms have already been it card, subscribe to a magazine tained address records. On another lev­ embedded in pocket computers the size or pay your taxes, that information goes el, the U.S. Internal Revenue Service has and thickness of a credit card. Such sys­ intoE a data base somewhere. Further­ attempted to single out taxpayers for tems have been tested on a small scale more, all these records can be linked audits based on estimates of house­ and could be in widespread use by the so that they constitute in effect a sin­ hold income compiled by mailing-list middle of this decade. gle dossier on your life-not only your companies. medical and financial history but also The growing amounts of information he starting point for this ap­ what you buy, where you travel and that different organizations collect proach is the digital Signature, whom you communicate with. It is al­ about a person can be linked because first proposed in 1976 by Whit­ most impossible to learn the full extent all of them use the same key-in the field Diffie, then at Stanford University. of the files that various organizations U.S.
    [Show full text]
  • HOW to REALLY CIRCULATE ELECTRONIC CASH on the INTERNET by Katsuhito Iwai
    HOW TO REALLY CIRCULATE ELECTRONIC CASH ON THE INTERNET by Katsuhito Iwai Professor of Economics, The University of Tokyo 7-3-1 Hongo, Bunkyo-ku, Tokyo, Japan 113 [email protected] or [email protected] August 28, 1995 (Japanese version: March 30, 1995) 1. An introductory remark The recent world-wide explosion of the Internet community has encouraged many individuals and groups to propose a variety of electronic payment systems that can be used safely and efficiently for the economic transactions on computer networks. Some proposals are mere variations on the traditional credit card system. But the more ambitious ones are aiming at an electronic cash system which turns an electronic stream of numbers, the only "thing" moving on lines, into 'electronic cash', or 'e-cash', that can be spent directly on on-line commercial wares. One such attempt is the DigiCash system of David Chaum.1 Since any message transmitted through the Internet is accessible to anyone who cares to look, and since any copied number is as good a number as the original one, the basic problem is to devise a copy-proof and cheat-proof transmission procedure among computer users. The DigiCash system has solved this by adopting the public-key cryptography for digital signatures that can secure the privacy of communicated messages as well as the authenticity of their communicators. It has also incorporated a device of blind signatures which assures the complete anonymity of its users. The DigiCash system (and other schemes based on similar principles) perhaps comes closest to the ideal of e-cash.
    [Show full text]
  • Single Term Off-Line Coins
    Single Term Off-Line Coins Niels Ferguson CWI, P.O. Box 94079, 1090 GB Amsterdam, Netherlands. e-mail: nielsacwi .nl Abstract. We present a new construction for off-line electronic coins that is both far more efficient and much simpler than pre- vious systems. Instead of using many terms, each for a single bit of the challenge, our system uses a single term for a large number of possible challenges. The withdrawal protocol does not use a cut- and-choose methodology as with earlier systems, but uses a direct construction. 1 Introduction The main requirements for an electronic cash system are the following: - Security. Every party in the electronic cash system should be protected from a collusion of all other parties (multi-party security). - Off-line. There should be no need for communication with a central authority during payment. - Fake Privacy. The bank and all the shops should together not be able to derive any knowledge from their protocol transcripts about where a user spends her money. - Privacy (untraceable). The bank should not be able to determine whether two payments were made by the same payer, even if all shops cooperate. The privacy requirement is obviously stronger then the fake privacy one. Under real-world circumstances, a payer is identified during some of the payments by means outside the electronic cash system. If two payments can be recognised as originating from the same payer, then knowing the identity of the payer during a single payment anywhere allows the tracing of all other payments made by that payer. Therefore, fake privacy provides no privacy at all in practice.
    [Show full text]
  • Desperately Seeking Satoshi; from Nowhere, Bitcoin Is Now Worth Billions
    Title: Desperately seeking Satoshi; From nowhere, bitcoin is now worth billions. Where did it come from? Andrew Smithset off to find Satoshi Nakamoto, the mysterious genius behind the hit e-currency Source: Sunday Times (London, England). (Mar. 2, 2014): News: p16. Document Type: Article Copyright : COPYRIGHT 2014 NI Syndication Limited. Sunday Times http://www.sunday-times.co.uk Full Text: it's late 2013; a converted brewery in hip east London, with bare-brick walls and double-espresso musk. For days, online forums have churned with plans for this unlikely 800-strong agglomeration of trend- seekers, geeks and the merely curious to converge from all corners of Britain, and they look a little shocked to be here, as if the focus of their shared fervour only now seems real. The focus is bitcoin, the bizarre electronic "cryptocurrency" that appeared out of nowhere at the start of 2009 and slowly, strangely, began to attract followers. With no clear reason to be worth anything, it was traded for pennies at the end of the first year, but after two years had achieved dollar parity, then more and as the price began to levitate, extraordinary things happened around it, with exchanges and odd frontier-style businesses grown, robbed, scammed as if in some free-market libertarian fantasy. Vexed economists cried "Bubble!" and predicted the end more loudly with each turn of bad news, after which bitcoin's value would crash, then simply continue its rise, until by the end of 2013 a single "coin" would cost you $1,000. Some investors predicted it would eventually reach $1m; others that it would be spam by the end of this year.
    [Show full text]
  • E-Cash Payment Protocols and Systems
    E-CASH PAYMENT PROTOCOLS AND SYSTEMS * MRS. J. NIMALA, Assistant Professor, PG and Research Department of Commerce with CA, Hindusthan College of Arts and Science, Coimbatore. TN INDIA ** MRS. N. MENAGA, Assistant Professor, PG and Research Department of Commerce with CA, Hindusthan College of Arts and Science, Coimbatore. TN INDIA Abstract E-cash is a payment system intended and implemented for making purchases over open networks such as the Internet. Require of a payment system which provides the electronic transactions are emergent at the similar moment that the exploit of Internet is budding in our daily life. Present days electronic payment systems have a major dilemma, they cannot switch the security and the user’s secrecy and at the same time these systems are secure on the cost of their users ambiguity. This paper shows the payment protocols for digital cash and discusses how a digital cash system can be fashioned by presenting a few of the recent day’s digital cash systems in details. We also offer a comparison and determine them mutually to see which one of them fulfils the properties for digital cash and the mandatory security level. Keywords: E-cash; Payment Protocol; Double Spending; Blind Signature. Introduction DigiCash is a private company founded in 1989 by Dr David Chaum. It has created an Internet money product, now patented, and called ‘ecash’. DigiCash’s ecash has been used for many different types of transactions. It is a stored-value cryptographic coin system that facilitates Internet-based commerce using software that runs on personal computers. It provides a way to implement anonymous electronic payments in an environment of mutual mistrust between the bank and the system users.
    [Show full text]
  • Blockchain > Cryptocurrency > Digital
    > Blockchain > Cryptocurrency > Digital Transformation > Internet of Things JANUARY 2020 www.computer.org Keep Your Career Options Open Upload Your Resume Today! Whether your enjoy your current position or you are ready for change, the IEEE Computer Society Jobs Board is a valuable resource tool. Take advantage of these special resources for job seekers: JOB ALERTS TEMPLATES CAREER RESUMES VIEWED ADVICE BY TOP EMPLOYERS No matter your career WEBINARS level, the IEEE Computer Society Jobs Board keeps you connected to workplace trends and exciting new career prospects. www.computer.org/jobs IEEE COMPUTER SOCIETY computer.org • +1 714 821 8380 STAFF Editor Publications Portfolio Managers Cathy Martin Carrie Clark, Kimberly Sperka Publications Operations Project Specialist Publisher Christine Anthony Robin Baldwin Production & Design Senior Advertising Coordinator Carmen Flores-Garvey Debbie Sims Circulation: ComputingEdge (ISSN 2469-7087) is published monthly by the IEEE Computer Society. IEEE Headquarters, Three Park Avenue, 17th Floor, New York, NY 10016-5997; IEEE Computer Society Publications Office, 10662 Los Vaqueros Circle, Los Alamitos, CA 90720; voice +1 714 821 8380; fax +1 714 821 4010; IEEE Computer Society Headquarters, 2001 L Street NW, Suite 700, Washington, DC 20036. Postmaster: Send address changes to ComputingEdge-IEEE Membership Processing Dept., 445 Hoes Lane, Piscataway, NJ 08855. Periodicals Postage Paid at New York, New York, and at additional mailing offices. Printed in USA. Editorial: Unless otherwise stated, bylined articles, as well as product and service descriptions, reflect the author’s or firm’s opinion. Inclusion in ComputingEdge does not necessarily constitute endorsement by the IEEE or the Computer Society. All submissions are subject to editing for style, clarity, and space.
    [Show full text]
  • Formal Analysis of E-Cash Protocols∗
    Formal Analysis of E-Cash Protocols∗ Jannik Dreier1, Ali Kassem2 Pascal Lafourcade3 1Institute of Information Security, Department of Computer Science, ETH Zurich, Switzerland 2 University Grenoble Alpes, VERIMAG, Grenoble, France 3University Clermont Auvergne, LIMOS, France Keywords: E-Cash, Formal Analysis, Double Spending, Exculpability, Privacy, Applied π-Calculus, ProVerif. Abstract: Electronic cash (e-cash) aims at achieving client privacy at payment, similar to real cash. Several security protocols have been proposed to ensure privacy in e-cash, as well as the necessary unforgery properties. In this paper, we propose a formal framework to define, analyze, and verify security properties of e-cash systems. To this end, we model e-cash systems in the applied π-calculus, and we define two client privacy properties and three properties to prevent forgery. Finally, we apply our definitions to an e-cash protocol from the literature proposed by Chaum et al., which has two variants and a real implementation based on it. Using ProVerif, we demonstrate that our framework is suitable for an automated analysis of this protocol. 1 Introduction In this protocol coins are non-transferable, i.e., the seller cannot spend a received coin again, but Although current banking and electronic pay- has to deposit it at the bank. If he wants to ment systems such as credit cards or, e.g., Pay- spend a coin in another shop, he has to withdraw Pal allow clients to transfer money around the a new coin from his account, similar to the usual world in a fraction of a second, they do not fully payment using cheques.
    [Show full text]
  • R a I L Artificial Intelligence & Law
    Volume 3, No. 6 | November–December 2020 The Journal of Robotics, R A I L Artificial Intelligence & Law Editor’s Note: Change Steven A. Meyerowitz Demystifying Blockchain and Cryptocurrencies David Kalat 5G Is Unleashing the Fourth Industrial Revolution—Here’s What It Means for Legal Systems Louis Lehot and Ethan Floyd Accelerating Change: From Smart City to Smart Society Oliver Brettle, Nicholas Greenacre, Tim Hickman, Andres Liivak, Daren Orzechowski, and Adam Pierson Mobility and Transportation Technology Review Ariel S. Wolf Is the Use of Open Source Software Putting Your Business at Risk? Samuel T. Tibbetts and Stuart James FTC Provides Guidance on Use of AI and Algorithms Terrell McSweeny, Lee J. Tiedrich, and Jadzia Pierce Everything Is Not Terminator: Defining AI in Contracts John Frank Weaver ® FULL COURT PRESS The Journal of Robotics, Artificial Intelligence & Law RAIL Volume 3, No. 6 | November–December 2020 373 Editor’s Note: Change Steven A. Meyerowitz 377 Demystifying Blockchain and Cryptocurrencies David Kalat 397 5G Is Unleashing the Fourth Industrial Revolution—Here’s What It Means for Legal Systems Louis Lehot and Ethan Floyd 407 Accelerating Change: From Smart City to Smart Society Oliver Brettle, Nicholas Greenacre, Tim Hickman, Andres Liivak, Daren Orzechowski, and Adam Pierson 415 Mobility and Transportation Technology Review Ariel S. Wolf 423 Is the Use of Open Source Software Putting Your Business at Risk? Samuel T. Tibbetts and Stuart James 431 FTC Provides Guidance on Use of AI and Algorithms Terrell McSweeny, Lee J. Tiedrich, and Jadzia Pierce 435 Everything Is Not Terminator: Defining AI in Contracts John Frank Weaver EDITOR-IN-CHIEF Steven A.
    [Show full text]
  • Selective Disclosure Credential Sets
    Selective Disclosure Credential Sets Jason E. Holt ([email protected]) Kent E. Seamons ([email protected]) ¤ Internet Security Research Lab Brigham Young University http://isrl.byu.edu/ Abstract We describe a credential system similar to the electronic cash system described by Chaum, Fiat and Naor. Our system uses bit commitments to create selective disclosure credentials which limit what portions of a credential the holder must reveal. We show how credentials from separate issuers can be linked to the same person in order to prevent users from pooling credentials to obtain services no one user could obtain alone. We also describe how to use a blinding technique described by Laurie which may not violate the patents on blind signatures. Keywords: digital credentials, selective disclosure, credential pooling, blind signatures. 1 Overview signed by the same issuer, and the documents in each column all share a common credential ID which Alice Alice wishes to obtain a service from Steve, a server. will use to prove to Steve that the documents in the Steve will only provide the service if Alice can demon- matrix belong together. To prove that she's honest, strate certain attributes about herself as attested by Alice includes information about certain columns of credential issuing authorities. Alice is willing to prove the matrix and sends the Credential Set Request to these attributes, but doesn't want Steve to get any each of the issuers of her credentials. Each issuer in- additional information about her, even if Steve works spects the request then blindly signs the unrevealed together with the credential issuers.
    [Show full text]
  • Cypherpunk Manifesto
    Cypherpunk Manifesto Murat Osmanoglu Cypherpunk Manifesto Cypherpunk Manifesto • ‘cypherpunk’ created from the words ‘cipher’ (or cypher) and ‘cyberpunk’ Cypherpunk Manifesto • ‘cypherpunk’ created from the words ‘cipher’ (or cypher) and ‘cyberpunk’ (a genre of science fiction set in a lawless subculture of an oppressive society dominated by computer technology) Cypherpunk Manifesto • ‘cypherpunk’ created from the words ‘cipher’ (or cypher) and ‘cyberpunk’ (a genre of science fiction set in a lawless subculture of an oppressive society dominated by computer technology) • an activist promoting wide use of strong crypto and privacy- enhancing technologies as a route to social and political change. Cypherpunk Manifesto • ‘cypherpunk’ created from the words ‘cipher’ (or cypher) and ‘cyberpunk’ (a genre of science fiction set in a lawless subculture of an oppressive society dominated by computer technology) • an activist promoting wide use of strong crypto and privacy- enhancing technologies as a route to social and political change. • its roots traced back to the study of David Chaum on anonymous digital cash and pseudonymous reputation systems Cypherpunk Manifesto • ‘cypherpunk’ created from the words ‘cipher’ (or cypher) and ‘cyberpunk’ (a genre of science fiction set in a lawless subculture of an oppressive society dominated by computer technology) • an activist promoting wide use of strong crypto and privacy- enhancing technologies as a route to social and political change. • its roots traced back to the study of David Chaum on anonymous digital cash and pseudonymous reputation systems ‘Security without Identification : Transaction Systems to Make Big Brother Obsolete’, 1985 Cypherpunk Manifesto • ‘cypherpunk’ created from the words ‘cipher’ (or cypher) and ‘cyberpunk’ (a genre of science fiction set in a lawless subculture of an oppressive society dominated by computer technology) • an activist promoting wide use of strong crypto and privacy- enhancing technologies as a route to social and political change.
    [Show full text]