From cd699bd9debd026a2425d7d9f9ad242ff0106875 Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001
From: Jeff Burdges
Date: Tue, 25 Sep 2018 01:21:23 -0400
Subject: Improve some TODOs in Income Transparency
---
taler-fc19/paper.tex | 6 +++---
1 file changed, 3 insertions(+), 3 deletions(-)
diff --git a/taler-fc19/paper.tex b/taler-fc19/paper.tex
index 30024a6..4ca94e0 100644
--- a/taler-fc19/paper.tex
+++ b/taler-fc19/paper.tex
@@ -1265,8 +1265,8 @@ Our instantiation satisfies {weak income transparency}.
in this graph, where each refresh $R_i \in F$ either results in a coin in
exclusive control of the adversary after step \ref{game:income:spend}, or the
refresh operation does not result in a coin at all.
- %TODO: The preceeding paragraph is basically nonsense. We need to resurect
- % correct construction of F from games.tex
+ %TODO: The preceeding paragraph is still basically nonsense.
+ % We need to resurect correct construction of F from games.tex
During each $R_i \in F$, the adversary must have submitted a blinded coin
and transfer public key for which the linking protocol fails to produce the
@@ -1283,7 +1283,7 @@ Our instantiation satisfies {weak income transparency}.
The last case can be excluded, because it would violate the key exchange
completeness assumption.
- % TODO: Wrong
+ % TODO: Still wrong because we need to talk about honest key generation somewhere
We shall prove
\begin{equation}\label{eq:income-transparency-proof}
--
cgit v1.2.3