[hashcash] Re: more format stuff
- From: Hubert Chan <hubert@xxxxxxxxx>
- To: hashcash@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
- Date: Wed, 24 Mar 2004 23:36:24 -0500
>>>>> "Eric" == Eric S Johansson <esj@xxxxxxxxxx> writes:
Eric> urk.. wrong word. what I was trying to say is that we need to be
Eric> able to expire stamp versions as acceptable stamp forms. I'm more
Eric> concerned about spammers launching attacks successfully and we
Eric> would need to change stamp forms and expire/obsolete earlier
Eric> versions.
Ah, I see. But from what I can see, v0 stamps should be no easier to
spoof/forge/etc. than v1 stamps. So this shouldn't be an issue for this
particular format change, right?
Actually, I guess the word "devalue" could work. If spammers are
somehow able to launch an attack on v0 and v1 stamps, we could decide
that, say, a 20 bit v0/v1 stamp is only worth as much as a 10 bit v2
stamp, so that those who are stuck with an old version of hashcash might
be able to make sure that their mail still gets through by bumping up
their length.
--
Hubert Chan <hubert@xxxxxxxxx> - http://www.uhoreg.ca/
PGP/GnuPG key: 1024D/124B61FA
Fingerprint: 96C5 012F 5F74 A5F7 1FF7 5291 AF29 C719 124B 61FA
Key available at wwwkeys.pgp.net. Encrypted e-mail preferred.
Other related posts:
