More importantly, where are they having this turkey?
In all seriousness though, if I were one of a handlful of people who understood a rising anonymous currency platform, I wouldn't want to be publicly exposed that way.
Indeed, even though a couple popular cryptographers have vouched, it's still not the classic definition of peer-reviewed for something that ground-breaking.
That aside, the MPC (Multi-Party Computation) setup is more of a security theater than actual security. It completely goes against of what cryptography is all about and I'm puzzled as to why any cryptographer would base their system's security in such a way.
It actually is the classic definition of peer reviewed! The paper on Zerocash (renamed Zcash) was published at the IEEE Symposium on Security and Privacy:
Do you mean to say the Zcash trusted setup shouldn't have used MPC? Or do you mean to say Zcash itself is fudnementally flawed due to the trusted setup?
kbody|9 years ago
That aside, the MPC (Multi-Party Computation) setup is more of a security theater than actual security. It completely goes against of what cryptography is all about and I'm puzzled as to why any cryptographer would base their system's security in such a way.
moyix|9 years ago
http://zerocash-project.org/media/pdf/zerocash-oakland2014.p...
It's a peer-reviewed conference and basically the top venue (along with Usenix Security and ACM CCS) for academic computer security.
I'm not sure what you mean by "for something that ground-breaking"?
petertodd|9 years ago
unknown|9 years ago
[deleted]