diff options
| author | Christian Grothoff <christian@grothoff.org> | 2013-09-25 13:24:51 +0000 |
|---|---|---|
| committer | Christian Grothoff <christian@grothoff.org> | 2013-09-25 13:24:51 +0000 |
| commit | a8c1c65a00dce604ff829dfe10568cd06c8f8bda (patch) | |
| tree | bf5069e69f36f3ce18137cbea43766fb8e4432f8 | |
| parent | aeeeaff2736808a6eaa2138272c46544676e49f3 (diff) | |
| download | gnunet-java-a8c1c65a00dce604ff829dfe10568cd06c8f8bda.tar.gz gnunet-java-a8c1c65a00dce604ff829dfe10568cd06c8f8bda.zip | |
-notes on issues
| -rw-r--r-- | ISSUES | 24 |
1 files changed, 22 insertions, 2 deletions
| @@ -43,26 +43,46 @@ what now works: | |||
| 43 | * querying the results (also with the GUID) | 43 | * querying the results (also with the GUID) |
| 44 | 44 | ||
| 45 | next steps?? | 45 | next steps?? |
| 46 | - Ballot: (a) voter ID, (b) election information, (c) election eligibility group (Bavaria 18+), (d) ballot GUID | ||
| 47 | - no double submission: check: no duplicate voter ID (for any given election) | ||
| 48 | - no early queries | ||
| 49 | - voter <--> CA interaction | ||
| 50 | => ideally, CA has a list of voter public keys or at least a policy (i.e. "accept all") | ||
| 51 | for a certain voter group (i.e. Bavaria 18+). | ||
| 52 | => CA also has a private CA key (surprise!) | ||
| 53 | => Voter has voter public key and voter group, sends THOSE to CA; | ||
| 54 | => CA signs: this voter is in this voter group (with expiration time for signature!) | ||
| 55 | => voter takes signature, can re-use it for ALL elections with this voter group | ||
| 56 | - Authorities have CA public keys, check voter group sigs. | ||
| 46 | 57 | ||
| 47 | what should be stored in the ballot about authorities: peer identities or peer public keys? | 58 | what should be stored in the ballot about authorities: peer identities or peer public keys? |
| 59 | => public keys | ||
| 60 | |||
| 48 | * pubkey makes more sense, but I have the feeling that GNUnet prefers to use | 61 | * pubkey makes more sense, but I have the feeling that GNUnet prefers to use |
| 49 | peer IDs whenever possible | 62 | peer IDs whenever possible |
| 63 | => Nah. | ||
| 50 | 64 | ||
| 51 | docs of identity service say: | 65 | docs of identity service say: |
| 52 | For giving names to other users and manage their public keys securely, we use GNS. | 66 | For giving names to other users and manage their public keys securely, we use GNS. |
| 53 | In what way does GNS manage public keys? Does GNS in any way relate peer identities to public keys? | 67 | In what way does GNS manage public keys? |
| 68 | GNS allows you to give names to other user's public keys. | ||
| 69 | Does GNS in any way relate peer identities to public keys? | ||
| 70 | No. | ||
| 54 | 71 | ||
| 55 | persistent storage of tallies? | 72 | persistent storage of tallies? |
| 73 | => Later. | ||
| 56 | 74 | ||
| 57 | now that the pubkey is smaller, are there reasons for still having | 75 | now that the pubkey is smaller, are there reasons for still having |
| 58 | a separate peer identity? | 76 | a separate peer identity? |
| 59 | * except for that it would be a lot of work to change now | 77 | * except for that it would be a lot of work to change now |
| 78 | => exactly. | ||
| 60 | 79 | ||
| 61 | the command line took looks a bit complicated now, any suggestions? | 80 | the command line took looks a bit complicated now, any suggestions? |
| 81 | => Later. | ||
| 62 | 82 | ||
| 63 | asking permission to vote should not require the private key, right? | 83 | asking permission to vote should not require the private key, right? |
| 64 | * how do we do this interface-wise? pubkey on the command line? | 84 | * how do we do this interface-wise? pubkey on the command line? |
| 65 | 85 | => Identity service, ego! | |
| 66 | 86 | ||
| 67 | == general java stuff == | 87 | == general java stuff == |
| 68 | what's your opinion on option types: should they be used more in gnunet-java? | 88 | what's your opinion on option types: should they be used more in gnunet-java? |