<?xml version="1.0" encoding="iso-8859-1" ?>
<rss version="2.0">
  <channel>
    <title>2005 Reports</title>
    <link>http://eprint.iacr.org/forum/list.php?5</link>
    <description><![CDATA[Discussion forum for Cryptology ePrint Archive reports posted in 2005.
Please put the report number in the subject.

]]></description>
    <language>EN</language>
    <pubDate>Mon, 06 Aug 2012 07:56:40 -0600</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Mon, 06 Aug 2012 07:56:40 -0600</lastBuildDate>
    <category>2005 Reports</category>
    <generator>Phorum 5.1.22</generator>
    <ttl>600</ttl>
    <item>
      <title>Re: 2005/422 Is ACJT group signature fully anonymous?</title>
      <link>http://eprint.iacr.org/forum/read.php?5,44,733#msg-733</link>
      <author>victorwilson</author>
      <description><![CDATA[Yes, ACJT is fully anonymous.]]></description>
      <category>2005 Reports</category>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">http://eprint.iacr.org/forum/read.php?5,44,733#msg-733</guid>
      <pubDate>Mon, 06 Aug 2012 07:56:40 -0600</pubDate>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>2005/422 Is ACJT group signature fully anonymous?</title>
      <link>http://eprint.iacr.org/forum/read.php?5,44,44#msg-44</link>
      <author>qlq</author>
      <description><![CDATA[''On Anonymity of Group Signatures ''
http://eprint.iacr.org/2005/422
this paper answers the question, and the result is that ACJT is fully anonymous (CCA2-secure) in ROM.
Is it right?
Since I couldn't totally agree with the proof.]]></description>
      <category>2005 Reports</category>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">http://eprint.iacr.org/forum/read.php?5,44,44#msg-44</guid>
      <pubDate>Fri, 18 Jan 2008 00:20:58 -0700</pubDate>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>
