No need for this :
The account NAME is the best verifcation and keeps things simple... IMHO
Patrick,
AnyGoldNow
Do as the banks do.
People who need to enter account numbers to spend make mistakes. This
happens more times than is acceptable. The merchant interface prevents
this by filling
On Sat, 28 Sep 2002, gb wrote:
Do as the banks do.
People who need to enter account numbers to spend make mistakes. This
happens more times than is acceptable. The merchant interface prevents
this by filling in the account number for you. But this doesn't help people
who have to fill in
Mark's DNS idea is actually quite a dumb idea because people mistype word as
much or more often than numbers. People guess words when searching, but they
don't guess numbers.
A checksum or similar feature is the best way to guard against these errors.
David Hillary
Do as the internet protocols
The obvious solution to the problem of account numbers (obvious I guess,
if you're in the DNS business ;) is to create a system which maps human
readable strings to the account numbers, similar to the way the Domain
Name system maps hostnames to IP addresses.
Something like this might also
At 08:25 PM 9/28/2002 -0400, uberhacker wrote:
Much like DNS poisoning in the current world, I foresee a similar tactic
being used by hackers if such a system were to be put into place.
Add to that the fact that whoever was in charge of this scheme has the
potential to steal loads of money,
On Sat, 28 Sep 2002, uberhacker wrote:
Much like DNS poisoning in the current world, I foresee a similar tactic
being used by hackers if such a system were to be put into place.
Hackers will always be up to something regardless of the system used.
Today we have the guys spamming with the
You do ask the big question though, who would be in charge of the
root DNS nodes? In the conventional world, its the US Government
(doesn't that instill you with confidence in the system?).
If there is some sort of organization of DGC providers that people
actually had faith in and worked
On Sun, 29 Sep 2002, David Hillary wrote:
Mark's DNS idea is actually quite a dumb idea because people mistype word as
much or more often than numbers.
Do they? Maybe you do. Maybe most other people don't. If domain names
didn't exist and people had to access everything via IP addresses my
Perhaps there is merit in the idea of a DGC implementing the DNS-style idea,
which I'd prefer to call an Account Alias. In every DGCs database, an
account has a unique identifier, be it all numbers, a letter and some
numbers or whatever. The point is it's unique. Thing is that account numbers
On Sat, 28 Sep 2002, uberhacker wrote:
That's the main point I wanted to make - who is in charge. In the DNS world
one can be pretty certain that the handful of root DNS servers are managed
by trustworthy individuals, and the machines are nice and safe. But in our
little world of digital
On Sat, 28 Sep 2002, uberhacker wrote:
Perhaps an alias would be more like an Australian domain name, where you
can't get a .com.au domain name unless you have a business with the same
name or an acceptable variant, or if it's your name. For a cost (since an
employee would have to do due
At 07:44 PM 9/28/2002 -0700, uberhacker wrote:
Perhaps there is merit in the idea of a DGC implementing the DNS-style idea,
which I'd prefer to call an Account Alias.
Goldmoney has this.
-- Patrick
---
You are currently subscribed to e-gold-list as: archive@jab.org
To unsubscribe send a blank
12 matches
Mail list logo
