--==<Quoting Uucp to John Schofield about "Re: Digital Cash">==-- Uu> I have always been skeptical of this observer-chip approach, because Uu> it wasn't clear that it was feasible to make a tamper-resistant chip Uu> economically, and because the specialized hardware that would be Uu> required would prevent the system from being used on widely-available Uu> PCs. However, now we see that our military rulers apparently trust Uu> tamper-resistant technology well enough to put it into thousands of Uu> public hands, without fear that even one chip will be opened and read. Uu> Breaking an observer only lets you double-spend the coins it holds, Uu> while breaking Clipper allows you to permanently defeat the escrow Uu> provisions of the whole system. So this suggests that the technology Uu> is adequate for observers. I once asked my grandfather if he was sure he could take apart the tractor he was working on. His response? "A man put it together." Anything one man can do, another can undo--the only variable is the degree of effort required. I'm sure we can make a tamper-resistant chip, but can we make a tamper-proof one? No. Considering the determination and intelligence of some of the people involved, I'm sure that a tamper-resistant chip would be compromised pretty quickly. --John Schofield ... I tried an internal modem, but it hurt when I walked. --- Blue Wave/RA v2.12 -- : John Schofield - via mcws.fidonet.org - Public Access (213)256-8371 : ARPA/INTERNET: John.Schofield@f903.n102.z1.fidonet.org : UUCP: ...!cheshire!mcws!903!John.Schofield : Compu$erve: >internet:John.Schofield@f903.n102.z1.fidonet.org