Nervous System: Think Cryptocurrency is New? You've Forgotten the '80s
A major technological barrier to developing viable digital currency is the 'double-spend' problem. In this month's look at the history of cybersecurity, David Kalat examines eCash's answer that far outdates bitcoin.
May 07, 2019 at 07:00 AM
6 minute read
With the aggressive pace of technological change and the onslaught of news regarding data breaches, cyber-attacks, and technological threats to privacy and security, it is easy to assume these are fundamentally new threats. The pace of technological change is slower than it feels, and many seemingly new categories of threats have actually been with us longer than we remember. Nervous System is a monthly blog that approaches issues of data privacy and cybersecurity from the context of history—to look to the past for clues about how to interpret the present and prepare for the future.
In 2008, a white paper entitled Bitcoin: A Peer-to-Peer Electronic Cash System introduced a new technology called blockchain and proposed a practical application of it for digital currency. Put simply, a blockchain is a database that derives its integrity and security from decentralized distribution across countless unregistered nodes—to attack and modify a record in a blockchain database would entail the logistical impossibility of simultaneously attacking every copy of that database on millions upon millions of independent computers scattered across the world. Bitcoin in turn leverages the integrity and security that derive from that peer-to-peer network as a base upon which to build trust in a public ledger of financial transactions, thereby creating an online alternative to banks.
In the years that have followed that white paper, blockchains have been deployed in a variety of scenarios. In addition to cryptocurrencies like Bitcoin and Ether, blockchains can be used to monitor supply chains, manage identity authentication, enforce intellectual property rights, transfer property rights, among many possibilities.
But despite growing public interest and attention to blockchain technology, the identity of its creator remains strangely obscure. The 2008 white paper is attributed to a “Satoshi Nakamoto,” widely understood to be a pseudonym for an unknown person or persons.
The idea of using cryptographic techniques to design a secure online currency actually predates by decades “Nakamoto” and that white paper. In the early 1980s, computer scientist David Chaum pioneered and implemented a form of digital cash that like Bitcoin also sought to disintermediate online transactions from banks.
A major technological barrier to developing viable digital currency is the “double-spend” problem. In the real world, the physical nature of cash provides clear boundaries around transactions. Once a dollar has been exchanged for some kind of good or service, the buyer no longer has it and cannot spend it again. In the digital world, those boundaries have to be constructed artificially. “Spending” money online means copying a certain chunk of data from one computer to another, at which time both computers have it. To effectively debit the spender's account by the right amount, a larger database infrastructure must log the transaction. Creating such database structures, however, erodes the privacy that was inherent in the cash transaction.
A bank has no way to know how a user intends to spend the cash she withdraws from her account; a merchant has no way to know the identity of the customer who pays in cash. Transitioning to electronic transactions has generally meant trading away anonymity and privacy in exchange for convenience.
In the early 1980s, Chaum, a privacy-minded student at the University of California at Berkeley, devised an alternative. He developed his idea from an analogy about voting by sealed ballot. The electoral authority verifies a voter's identity, ensures the voter does not vote twice, and protects the integrity of the process, without ever knowing which candidate the voter selected. The same principle can be applied, via cryptography, to online transactions. As Chaum told Forbes magazine in 2019, “Cash is a bearer instrument, and is peer-to-peer, permissionless, and confidential. Digital cash should ideally share these same characteristics.”
Chaum's 1981 thesis, “Blind Signatures for Untraceable Payments,” proposed one kind of cryptography to mask the content of a message and a second kind to digitally sign that masked message. The digital signature provides a means to mathematically prove that the message came from a specific trusted sender, but in this scenario that verification does not expose the content of the communication. In Chaum's proposal, this technique would be used to allow a payer to instruct a bank to deduct a certain value from her account and to separately convey instructions to the bank to deposit value to a payee's account, without the bank knowing the transactions were related and without the payee knowing from whom the purchase came.
In 1983, Chaum developed his idea further into a proposal for anonymous electronic money he called “eCash.” Using cryptographic blind signatures, eCash software could allow users to make purchases from vendors without having to open accounts, exchange credit card numbers, or leave an audit trail identifying themselves.
By 1989, Chaum had launched the DigiCash Corporation to implement his idea on a commercial scale. But DigiCash suffered from being too early a pioneer. Almost no one used the Internet at the time. Until there was a sufficient volume of online ecommerce to protect, Chaum was selling a solution to a problem no one had. DigiCash fell into bankruptcy in 1998.
Although his work is more notable in hindsight than it was a commercial success, Chaum's relevance to the world of blockchain technology continues today, as he has introduced his own Bitcoin rival, Elixxir. Chaum has noted that cryptocurrencies like Bitcoin and Ether rely on digital signatures, much like his 1980s version of eCash, but handle those signature calculations in inefficient ways. This limits the number of concurrent transactions those blockchains can handle. Chaum claims to have devised more efficient digital-signing techniques to allow exponentially more transactions per second. Introduced in late 2018, Elixxir began as a free messaging application, intending to build its network base before enabling payments between users at some point in the future.
David Kalat is Director, Global Investigations + Strategic Intelligence at Berkeley Research Group. David is a computer forensic investigator and e-discovery project manager. Disclaimer for commentary: The views and opinions expressed in this article are those of the author and do not necessarily reflect the opinions, position, or policy of Berkeley Research Group, LLC or its other employees and affiliates.
This content has been archived. It is available through our partners, LexisNexis® and Bloomberg Law.
To view this content, please continue to their sites.
Not a Lexis Subscriber?
Subscribe Now
Not a Bloomberg Law Subscriber?
Subscribe Now
NOT FOR REPRINT
© 2025 ALM Global, LLC, All Rights Reserved. Request academic re-use from www.copyright.com. All other uses, submit a request to [email protected]. For more information visit Asset & Logo Licensing.
You Might Like
View AllTrending Stories
- 1Big Law Firms Sheppard Mullin, Morgan Lewis and Baker Botts Add Partners in Houston
- 2Lack of Jurisdiction Dooms Child Sex Abuse Claim Against Archdiocese of Philadelphia, says NJ Supreme Court
- 3DC Lawsuits Seek to Prevent Mass Firings and Public Naming of FBI Agents
- 4Growth of California Firms Exceeded Expectations, Survey of Managing Partners Says
- 5Blank Rome Adds Life Sciences Trio From Reed Smith
Who Got The Work
J. Brugh Lower of Gibbons has entered an appearance for industrial equipment supplier Devco Corporation in a pending trademark infringement lawsuit. The suit, accusing the defendant of selling knock-off Graco products, was filed Dec. 18 in New Jersey District Court by Rivkin Radler on behalf of Graco Inc. and Graco Minnesota. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Zahid N. Quraishi, is 3:24-cv-11294, Graco Inc. et al v. Devco Corporation.
Who Got The Work
Rebecca Maller-Stein and Kent A. Yalowitz of Arnold & Porter Kaye Scholer have entered their appearances for Hanaco Venture Capital and its executives, Lior Prosor and David Frankel, in a pending securities lawsuit. The action, filed on Dec. 24 in New York Southern District Court by Zell, Aron & Co. on behalf of Goldeneye Advisors, accuses the defendants of negligently and fraudulently managing the plaintiff's $1 million investment. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Vernon S. Broderick, is 1:24-cv-09918, Goldeneye Advisors, LLC v. Hanaco Venture Capital, Ltd. et al.
Who Got The Work
Attorneys from A&O Shearman has stepped in as defense counsel for Toronto-Dominion Bank and other defendants in a pending securities class action. The suit, filed Dec. 11 in New York Southern District Court by Bleichmar Fonti & Auld, accuses the defendants of concealing the bank's 'pervasive' deficiencies in regards to its compliance with the Bank Secrecy Act and the quality of its anti-money laundering controls. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Arun Subramanian, is 1:24-cv-09445, Gonzalez v. The Toronto-Dominion Bank et al.
Who Got The Work
Crown Castle International, a Pennsylvania company providing shared communications infrastructure, has turned to Luke D. Wolf of Gordon Rees Scully Mansukhani to fend off a pending breach-of-contract lawsuit. The court action, filed Nov. 25 in Michigan Eastern District Court by Hooper Hathaway PC on behalf of The Town Residences LLC, accuses Crown Castle of failing to transfer approximately $30,000 in utility payments from T-Mobile in breach of a roof-top lease and assignment agreement. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Susan K. Declercq, is 2:24-cv-13131, The Town Residences LLC v. T-Mobile US, Inc. et al.
Who Got The Work
Wilfred P. Coronato and Daniel M. Schwartz of McCarter & English have stepped in as defense counsel to Electrolux Home Products Inc. in a pending product liability lawsuit. The court action, filed Nov. 26 in New York Eastern District Court by Poulos Lopiccolo PC and Nagel Rice LLP on behalf of David Stern, alleges that the defendant's refrigerators’ drawers and shelving repeatedly break and fall apart within months after purchase. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Joan M. Azrack, is 2:24-cv-08204, Stern v. Electrolux Home Products, Inc.
Featured Firms
Law Offices of Gary Martin Hays & Associates, P.C.
(470) 294-1674
Law Offices of Mark E. Salomone
(857) 444-6468
Smith & Hassler
(713) 739-1250