Electronic Cash with Anonymous User Suspension

  • Man Ho Au
  • Willy Susilo
  • Yi Mu
Part of the Lecture Notes in Computer Science book series (LNCS, volume 6812)

Abstract

Electronic cash (E-cash) is the digital counterpart of cash payment. They allow users to spend anonymously unless they “double spend” their electronic coins. However, it is not possible to prevent users from misbehaving under some other subjective definitions of misbehavior, such as money laundering. One solution is to incorporate a trusted third party (TTP), which, upon complaint, uses its power to deanonymize the suspected user. This solution, known as fair e-cash, is not fully satisfactory since additional measure has to be taken to stop misbehaving users from further abusing the system after they have been identified. We present a e-cash system with anonymous user suspension, EC-AUS, which features an suspension manager (SM) that is capable of suspending the underlying user that participates in any suspicious transaction. Suspended users cannot participate in any transaction. The suspension is anonymous in the sense that no party, not even SM, can tell the identities of the suspended users nor link their past transactions. If they are found innocent later, their suspension can be revoked easily.

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. 1.
    Au, M.H., Susilo, W., Mu, Y.: Constant-Size Dynamic k-TAA. In: Prisco, R.D., Yung, M. (eds.) SCN 2006. LNCS, vol. 4116, pp. 111–125. Springer, Heidelberg (2006)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Au, M.H., Susilo, W., Mu, Y.: Practical Compact E-Cash. In: Pieprzyk, J., Ghodosi, H., Dawson, E. (eds.) ACISP 2007. LNCS, vol. 4586, pp. 431–445. Springer, Heidelberg (2007)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Bellare, M.: A Note on Negligible Functions. J. Cryptology 15(4), 271–284 (2002)MathSciNetCrossRefMATHGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Bellare, M., Rogaway, P.: Random Oracles are Practical: A Paradigm for Designing Efficient Protocols. In: ACM Conference on Computer and Communications Security, pp. 62–73 (1993)Google Scholar
  5. 5.
    Boneh, D., Boyen, X.: Short Signatures without Random Oracles. In: Cachin, C., Camenisch, J.L. (eds.) EUROCRYPT 2004. LNCS, vol. 3027, pp. 56–73. Springer, Heidelberg (2004)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Boneh, D., Boyen, X., Shacham, H.: Short Group Signatures. In: Franklin, M. (ed.) CRYPTO 2004. LNCS, vol. 3152, pp. 41–55. Springer, Heidelberg (2004)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Brands, S.: Untraceable Off-line Cash in Wallets with Observers (Extended Abstract). In: Stinson, D.R. (ed.) CRYPTO 1993. LNCS, vol. 773, pp. 302–318. Springer, Heidelberg (1994)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Brickell, E., Li, J.: Enhanced Privacy ID: A Direct Anonymous Attestation Scheme with Enhanced Revocation Capabilities. In: WPES, pp. 21–30 (2007)Google Scholar
  9. 9.
    Camenisch, J., Dubovitskaya, M., Neven, G.: Oblivious Transfer with Access Control. In: Al-Shaer, E., Jha, S., Keromytis, A.D. (eds.) ACM Conference on Computer and Communications Security, pp. 131–140. ACM, New York (2009)Google Scholar
  10. 10.
    Camenisch, J., Hohenberger, S., Lysyanskaya, A.: Compact E-Cash. In: Cramer, R. (ed.) EUROCRYPT 2005. LNCS, vol. 3494, pp. 302–321. Springer, Heidelberg (2005)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Camenisch, J., Lysyanskaya, A.: A Signature Scheme with Efficient Protocols. In: Cimato, S., Galdi, C., Persiano, G. (eds.) SCN 2002. LNCS, vol. 2576, pp. 268–289. Springer, Heidelberg (2003)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Camenisch, J., Shoup, V.: Practical Verifiable Encryption and Decryption of Discrete Logarithms. In: Boneh, D. (ed.) CRYPTO 2003. LNCS, vol. 2729, pp. 126–144. Springer, Heidelberg (2003)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Camenisch, J., Stadler, M.: Efficient Group Signature Schemes for Large Groups (Extended Abstract). In: Kaliski Jr., B.S. (ed.) CRYPTO 1997. LNCS, vol. 1294, pp. 410–424. Springer, Heidelberg (1997)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Canard, S., Gouget, A.: Divisible E-Cash Systems can be Truly Anonymous. In: Naor, M. (ed.) EUROCRYPT 2007. LNCS, vol. 4515, pp. 482–497. Springer, Heidelberg (2007)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Canard, S., Traoré, J.: On Fair E-cash Systems Based on Group Signature Schemes. In: Safavi-Naini, R., Seberry, J. (eds.) ACISP 2003. LNCS, vol. 2727, pp. 237–248. Springer, Heidelberg (2003)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Canetti, R.: Universally Composable Security: A New Paradigm for Cryptographic Protocols. Cryptology ePrint Archive, Report 2000/067 (2000), http://eprint.iacr.org/
  17. 17.
    Chan, A.H., Frankel, Y., Tsiounis, Y.: Easy Come - Easy Go Divisible Cash. In: Nyberg, K. (ed.) EUROCRYPT 1998. LNCS, vol. 1403, pp. 561–575. Springer, Heidelberg (1998)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
    Chaum, D.: Blind Signatures for Untraceable Payments. In: Advances in Cryptology: Proceedings of CRYPTO 1982, pp. 199–203. Plenum, New York (1983)Google Scholar
  19. 19.
    Chaum, D., Fiat, A., Naor, M.: Untraceable Electronic Cash. In: Goldwasser, S. (ed.) CRYPTO 1988. LNCS, vol. 403, pp. 319–327. Springer, Heidelberg (1990)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. 20.
    Chaum, D., Pedersen, T.P.: Transferred Cash Grows in Size. In: Rueppel, R.A. (ed.) EUROCRYPT 1992. LNCS, vol. 658, pp. 390–407. Springer, Heidelberg (1993)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. 21.
    Cramer, R., Damgård, I., MacKenzie, P.D.: Efficient Zero-Knowledge Proofs of Knowledge without Intractability Assumptions. In: Imai, H., Zheng, Y. (eds.) PKC 2000. LNCS, vol. 1751, pp. 354–373. Springer, Heidelberg (2000)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. 22.
    Damgård, I.: Efficient Concurrent Zero-Knowledge in the Auxiliary String Model. In: Preneel, B. (ed.) EUROCRYPT 2000. LNCS, vol. 1807, pp. 418–430. Springer, Heidelberg (2000)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. 23.
    Eng, T., Okamoto, T.: Single-Term Divisible Electronic Coins. In: De Santis, A. (ed.) EUROCRYPT 1994. LNCS, vol. 950, pp. 306–319. Springer, Heidelberg (1995)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. 24.
    Franklin, M.K., Yung, M.: Secure and Efficient Off-Line Digital Money (Extended Abstract). In: Lingas, A., Carlsson, S., Karlsson, R. (eds.) ICALP 1993. LNCS, vol. 700, pp. 265–276. Springer, Heidelberg (1993)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. 25.
    Goldwasser, S., Micali, S., Rackoff, C.: The Knowledge Complexity of Interactive Proof-Systems (Extended Abstract). In: STOC, pp. 291–304 (1985)Google Scholar
  26. 26.
    Goldwasser, S., Micali, S., Rivest, R.L.: A digital signature scheme secure against adaptive chosen-message attacks. SIAM J. Comput. 17(2), 281–308 (1988)MathSciNetCrossRefMATHGoogle Scholar
  27. 27.
    Kiayias, A., Tsiounis, Y., Yung, M.: Traceable Signatures. In: Cachin, C., Camenisch, J. (eds.) EUROCRYPT 2004. LNCS, vol. 3027, pp. 571–589. Springer, Heidelberg (2004)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. 28.
    Okamoto, T., Ohta, K.: Universal Electronic Cash. In: Feigenbaum, J. (ed.) CRYPTO 1991. LNCS, vol. 576, pp. 324–337. Springer, Heidelberg (1992)Google Scholar
  29. 29.
    Tsang, P.P., Au, M.H., Kapadia, A., Smith, S.W.: Blacklistable Anonymous Credentials: Blocking Misbehaving Users without TTPs. In: ACMCCS 2007, pp. 72–81 (2007)Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg 2011

Authors and Affiliations

  • Man Ho Au
    • 1
  • Willy Susilo
    • 1
  • Yi Mu
    • 1
  1. 1.Centre for Computer and Information Security Research, School of Computer Science and Software EngineeringUniversity of WollongongAustralia

Personalised recommendations