@leashless @frabcus gfshare uses all inputs. So you risk leaking who voted which way. If that is not a problem then we may have something.
1
@dsilverstone @frabcus Clearly separation of powers is going to be needed - shares handed out by one hand, counted by another type of thing
1
@leashless @frabcus I'm getting a tad lost now :-) I think it'd have to be a round-table -- perhaps on IRC -- to get this right in my head.
5
@dsilverstone @frabcus If it is, in your opinion, return "guilty share" otherwise, return random block. Result at end is either ID or not.
1
@leashless @frabcus gfshare can't do that because it *has* to trust the entire set of shares given to it. We *could* try the N subsets.
2
@dsilverstone @frabcus Wait, what's the behavior on a bum share - surely it just doesn't return the original? You get a failure?
1
@leashless @frabcus On a bum share, you get random crap. gfshare you either get exactly what you wanted, or exactly nothing of use.
1
@leashless @frabcus If it's unanimous guilt otherwise nothing, then yes you can have that. If it's some defined majority guilt you can't
2
1
@dsilverstone @frabcus That's OK, actually - it's not too big a space to permute. Anyway, early stage thinking, we've got a year probably.
2
1
@leashless @frabcus Problem with permutation is that you now know who voted which way. if that's not an issue then you win.
Jun 14, 2013 ยท 9:43 AM UTC
1