[GNUnet-SVN] r29539 - gnunet-java

[gnunet]

Author: grothoff
Date: 2013-09-25 15:24:51 +0200 (Wed, 25 Sep 2013)
New Revision: 29539

Modified:
   gnunet-java/ISSUES
Log:
-notes on issues

Modified: gnunet-java/ISSUES
===================================================================
--- gnunet-java/ISSUES  2013-09-25 13:19:26 UTC (rev 29538)
+++ gnunet-java/ISSUES  2013-09-25 13:24:51 UTC (rev 29539)
@@ -43,27 +43,47 @@
  * querying the results (also with the GUID)
 
 next steps??
+- Ballot: (a) voter ID, (b) election information, (c) election eligibility 
group (Bavaria 18+), (d) ballot GUID
+- no double submission: check: no duplicate voter ID (for any given election)
+- no early queries
+- voter <--> CA interaction
+  => ideally, CA has a list of voter public keys or at least a policy (i.e. 
"accept all") 
+     for a certain voter group (i.e. Bavaria 18+). 
+  => CA also has a private CA key (surprise!)
+  => Voter has voter public key and voter group, sends THOSE to CA;
+  => CA signs: this voter is in this voter group (with expiration time for 
signature!)
+  => voter takes signature, can re-use it for ALL elections with this voter 
group
+- Authorities have CA public keys, check voter group sigs.
 
 what should be stored in the ballot about authorities: peer identities or peer 
public keys?
+=> public keys
+
  * pubkey makes more sense, but I have the feeling that GNUnet prefers to use
    peer IDs whenever possible
+=> Nah.
 
 docs of identity service say:
   For giving names to other users and manage their public keys securely, we 
use GNS.
-In what way does GNS manage public keys? Does GNS in any way relate peer 
identities to public keys?
+In what way does GNS manage public keys? 
+  GNS allows you to give names to other user's public keys.
+Does GNS in any way relate peer identities to public keys?
+  No.
 
 persistent storage of tallies?
+  => Later.
 
 now that the pubkey is smaller, are there reasons for still having
 a separate peer identity?
  * except for that it would be a lot of work to change now
+=> exactly.
 
 the command line took looks a bit complicated now, any suggestions?
+=> Later.
 
 asking permission to vote should not require the private key, right?
  * how do we do this interface-wise? pubkey on the command line?
+=> Identity service, ego!
 
-
 == general java stuff ==
 what's your opinion on option types: should they be used more in gnunet-java?