[Cryptography] Proposal of a fair contract signing protocol

Allen allenpmd at gmail.com
Wed Jun 22 15:43:56 EDT 2016

> Mok-Kong has this note at the end of the protocol:
>    Note that after step (2) Alice cannot innocently refuse to perform
>    step (3), since the pair (X,Y) stems from her. In other words, after
>    step (2) the contract is de facto completed.
> To me, it appears that "de facto completed" means there's an escape valve.
> If the protocol says that Alice does X, Bob does Y, and Alice is supposed
> to do Z, but if she doesn't, tough -- then the protocol terminates.
> Of course, this might be unsatisfactory on some level and there may need
> to be software duct tape and chicken wire to make it work. But it sounds to
> me like there's the escape clause here.
> Am I right or not?

The protocol does not define a verification procedure that can be used to
tell if the contract is valid or not, and without this, it is impossible to
say what affect an "escape clause" would have, if in fact there is one.
Until the protocol is completed by formally defining a contract
verification procedure, it looks to me like any effort to analyze is an
exercise in guesses and assumptions.
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://www.metzdowd.com/pipermail/cryptography/attachments/20160622/e65a62bc/attachment.html>

More information about the cryptography mailing list