A stab at the sealer in E

Mark S. Miller markm@caplet.com
Mon, 08 Nov 1999 22:09:56 -0800

At 09:53 PM 11/8/99 , hal@finney.org wrote:
>Also, your Vat to Vat protocol does not try to camouflage traffic
>patterns; although the data is encrypted, an eavesdropper can determine
>when communications occur, and how much data is sent.

 From talking to Ian Goldberg, I believe Pluribus would be perfectly happy to 
live on top of the Freedom network.  Pluribus does nothing for 
untraceability.  Freedom (from our point of view) does nothing but 
untraceability.  These seem like orthogonal composable parts of the puzzle.  
Our standard high security scenario for analyzing possible risk should 
therefore probably be Pluribus on Freedom (assuming ZKS open sources it), 
and users who consider the untraceability of value.  I don't want to blow 
this kind of value elsewhere in the architecture.

Btw, an I using the right terminology?  I would say that E/Pluribus provides 
pseudonymity & bearer rights, Freedom provides untraceability, and Blinding 
provides unlinkability.  Robust privacy benefits from having all three