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