Re: [Taler] [address@hidden: 'Oh, that's an idea...': U.S. parents respond to China screen time ban]

[Jacob Bachmeyer]

Jeff Burdges wrote:
> > On 7 Sep 2021, at 05:17, Richard Stallman <rms@gnu.org> wrote:
> > how does that relate to practical questions, such as whether the server 
> > implements
> > DRM and the browser helps?
> >     
>
> I've never spoke about DRM here and DRM seems totally off-topic. 
>
> Jacob miss-read my comment because I wrote "their own browser would not do so” when 
> I should’ve written "their own browser could not do so.”  In my defence, my entire 
> long comment was about a type of cryptographic ring signature, and human language has 
> plenty of error correction, so it’s completely disingenuous to suddenly read in DRM over 
> one c being a w.

Correct; I misread your comment.  A better way to write that would have 
been "their browser would be unable to complete the session negotiation" 
or similar and explain that the server is specifically demanding a 
zero-knowledge proof.

On balance, this looks similar to TLS client certificates, except that 
the server is unable to determine *which* client is opening a session.  
This is considerably less nasty than your imprecision had hinted at earlier.

How does your proposed system handle a "borrowed" or outright stolen 
user key?  The server cannot identify the user, so how can Mallory 
walking off with a copy of Alice's key be detected?


-- Jacob