Re: Is there an anonymous contribution protocol?
Date: Tue, 19 Oct 1999 15:48:28 -0400 From: Reusch [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Is there an anonymous contribution protocol? A couple of months ago, someone (unfortunately, I dont recall the name or date) wrote to the New York Times, suggesting that all political contributions be made anonymously. http://www.counterpane.com/street_performer.html Using this protocol, people would place donations in escrow, to be released to an author in the event that the promised work is put in the public domain. This protocol has the potential to fund alternative or "marginal" works. the analogy seems clear. cheers, t
Is there an anonymous contribution protocol?
A couple of months ago, someone (unfortunately, I dont recall the name or date) wrote to the New York Times, suggesting that all political contributions be made anonymously. Given the continuous contention that the issue of political contributions causes in the US, I was intrigued by the idea and have thought about it, off-and-on, since even though connected people snort derisively at the idea and I assume it has the political viability of the Caesar cipher at the NSA. Nevertheless, I wonder whether a suitable protocol has already been invented. Typically, a contributor would like to be able to confirm his donative status with a political party or candidate, as would the party or candidate for, their targeted mailings and such. Thus, any anonymous political contribution protocol would involve proofs of membership and share much with secure election protocols. However, these are not sufficient. It should be difficult for the recipient to discover the amount of the claimed contribution. The contributor might say to the recipient, I will contribute $100,000 to your campaign at exactly 2:03 PM USA PST. While a third party, that anonymizes the transfer of funds, would be involved, immediate tracking of the balance could reveal the identity of the contributor. Limited reporting of the current balance or, using MixMaster-like techniques to obfuscate fund transfers, may do for high traffic ($$$) recipients. Further, it ought to be be difficult for a contributor to collect proofs of contribution from other people that he has illicitly funded in the classical "Gore-Buddhist-Temple" attack (http://www.realchange.org/gore.htm#buddhist) to later present to the recipient. This seems hard and may justify a very low minimum contribution. While, "I am not a lawyer", I am certain that there are labyrinthian free speech issues involved in mandated anonymous political contributions. While the fact that we voted is recorded in the US, the side that we voted for is concealed (I hope so, having made no detailed examination of the internals of voting machines. Such is Trust.). Even though anonymous voluntary free speech is protected here, it is a thick slice between "I contributed" and "I contributed $100,000. Here is my receipt! Get the bedroom ready." Michael
Re: Is there an anonymous contribution protocol?
At 3:48 PM -0400 on 10/19/99, Reusch wrote: "I contributed $100,000. Here is my receipt! Get the bedroom ready." Right. See http://www.xs4all.nl/~brands/order.txt There's an echo in the room, isn't there? :-). Cheers, RAH - Robert A. Hettinga mailto: [EMAIL PROTECTED] The Internet Bearer Underwriting Corporation http://www.ibuc.com/ 44 Farquhar Street, Boston, MA 02131 USA "... however it may deserve respect for its usefulness and antiquity, [predicting the end of the world] has not been found agreeable to experience." -- Edward Gibbon, 'Decline and Fall of the Roman Empire'
Re: Is there an anonymous contribution protocol?
Michael Reusch, [EMAIL PROTECTED], writes: A couple of months ago, someone (unfortunately, I don't recall the name or date) wrote to the New York Times, suggesting that all political contributions be made anonymously. Given the continuous contention that the issue of political contributions causes in the US, I was intrigued by the idea and have thought about it, off-and-on, since even though connected people snort derisively at the idea and I assume it has the political viability of the Caesar cipher at the NSA. Nevertheless, I wonder whether a suitable protocol has already been invented. One way to approach protocol design for such problems is to first specify how the system would be done if there were a trusted third party (TTP). The TTP is perfectly trustworthy, honest, and reliable. Define the behavior he would have which would solve your problem, then look for a crypto protocol which accomplishes the same thing. Generally, any TTP protocol can be turned into a crypto protocol by straightforward techniques, but the resulting crypto protocols will generally not be efficient. You can then look for shortcuts or approximations to produce efficient crypto protocols to accomplish the same thing. Maybe you could try to clarify how the TTP would behave in order to accomplish what you desire with regard to anonymous contributions. What information would the TTP have? What kinds of interactions would it have to have with the participants? Expressing this in detail would be a good first step in looking to see whether a crypto protocol could be designed to do the same thing.
