Remove Florian's Lemmas that we do not use

1 files changed, 0 insertions, 27 deletions

diff --git a/games/games.tex b/games/games.tex
index abea14c..8e3ac77 100644
--- a/games/games.tex
+++ b/games/games.tex
@@ -564,33 +564,6 @@ $P[{b \over \ell-w} \ge (1-{1\over\kappa})] = 1/2 > {1\over\kappa}$.
 % injectivity of the ECDH operation seems like a red herring???
 
 
-
-To win the game, the adversary must produce enough coins that are not in the wallet of any non-corrupted user, but withdraw little
-coins via corrupted users.
-
-\begin{lemma}
-  The signatures on $C_1, \dots, C_\ell$ must have been obtained by using either \ora{Withdraw}, \ora{RefreshReveal} or \ora{Link}.
-\end{lemma}
-
-\begin{lemma}
-  \ora{Link} can not be used to get a coin from a non-corrupted peer.
-\end{lemma}
-
-\begin{lemma}
-  To win the Income Transparency game, the adversary must call $\ora{RefreshReveal}$ at least $(\kappa V_r - V_w) > 0$ times
-  in a way that causes the linking step to fail.  (This implies unforgeability.)
-\end{lemma}
-
-\begin{lemma}
-  The probability to successfully use \ora{RefreshCommit} and \ora{RefreshReveal} in a way that causes \algo{Link} to return $\bot$ is at most $1/\kappa$.
-\end{lemma}
-
-\begin{theorem}
-  The adversary wins the Income Transparency game with with probability at most $1 / \kappa$.
-\end{theorem}
-
-FIXME:  We should also include what the expected ``untaxed'' money for the adversary is for each won game, vs. the money wasted.
-
 \section{Standard Definitions}
 \begin{definition}[One-more forgery]
 For any integer $\ell$, an $(\ell, \ell + 1)$-