Re: [camram-spam] Re: Re: Friday news

At 09:19 AM 3/26/2004, Eric S. Johansson wrote:

>Adam Back wrote:
>
>>I notice in that article that it says CAMRAM requires 23 bit hashcash
>>stamps.  This is a stamp considered of sufficient value to add a user
>>to a whitelist, right?
>
>that's *my* interpretation/evaluation.  Remember, we really don't know=20
>where the right threshold is because we don't have a sufficient deployme=
nt=20
>or body of experience.  For the purposes of the article, I needed to put=
 a=20
>stake in the ground and so, 23 bits.

IIRC (Invisible IRC Project) chose 27-bit collisions, which seems to be=20
working fine.  It should be noted that IIRC uses hashcash for nym=20
registration, a much less frequent event.

steve=20