2013
DOI: 10.1007/978-3-642-36334-4_20
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Divisible E-Cash in the Standard Model

Abstract: Abstract. Off-line e-cash systems are the digital analogue of regular cash. One of the main desirable properties is anonymity: spending a coin should not reveal the identity of the spender and, at the same time, users should not be able to double-spend coins without being detected. Compact e-cash systems make it possible to store a wallet of O(2 L ) coins using O(L + λ) bits, where λ is the security parameter. They are called divisible whenever the user has the flexibility of spending an amount of 2 , for some… Show more

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
3
1
1

Citation Types

0
35
0

Year Published

2013
2013
2016
2016

Publication Types

Select...
3
2

Relationship

0
5

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 8 publications
(35 citation statements)
references
References 40 publications
0
35
0
Order By: Relevance
“…Remark 3 The e‐cash systems from [15–17, 19] considered the balance property, requiring that no coalition of users can spend (and then later be accepted for deposit) more than they have withdrawn, and the identification property, requiring that no coalition of users can double‐spend a coin without revealing their identity. We argue that traceability is enough.…”
Section: Divisible E‐cash Systemmentioning
confidence: 99%
See 3 more Smart Citations
“…Remark 3 The e‐cash systems from [15–17, 19] considered the balance property, requiring that no coalition of users can spend (and then later be accepted for deposit) more than they have withdrawn, and the identification property, requiring that no coalition of users can double‐spend a coin without revealing their identity. We argue that traceability is enough.…”
Section: Divisible E‐cash Systemmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Remark 4 An entity knowing the random scalars ( r s , l f ) used to generate the public parameters will be able to break the anonymity of our scheme. This problem already appears when generating the CRS from Groth–Sahai proofs (whose construction is not specified in [19]). To avoid the need of a trusted entity (although this last one would intervene only during the Setup phase) the public parameters can be cooperatively generated by the bank and a set of users.…”
Section: First Constructionmentioning
confidence: 99%
See 2 more Smart Citations
“…Moreover, we give the rigid security proof of the new scheme in the standard model. 3. As an additional result, we solve the open problem presented by Blanton [13] that the identity of the last payee is linkable in the spending and deposit protocol.…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 95%