gnunet-svn
[Top][All Lists]
Advanced

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

[donau] 04/04: many smaller changes to to edits, done with intro


From: gnunet
Subject: [donau] 04/04: many smaller changes to to edits, done with intro
Date: Wed, 22 Jan 2025 01:12:41 +0100

This is an automated email from the git hooks/post-receive script.

tanja-lange pushed a commit to branch master
in repository donau.

commit d8a34cb306ea37478c4ad458947e5554c21171dd
Author: Tanja Lange <tanja@hyperelliptic.org>
AuthorDate: Wed Jan 22 01:12:17 2025 +0100

    many smaller changes to to edits, done with intro
---
 doc/usenix-security-2025/paper/intro.tex | 34 ++++++++++++++++++++------------
 1 file changed, 21 insertions(+), 13 deletions(-)

diff --git a/doc/usenix-security-2025/paper/intro.tex 
b/doc/usenix-security-2025/paper/intro.tex
index 4e78205..53db505 100644
--- a/doc/usenix-security-2025/paper/intro.tex
+++ b/doc/usenix-security-2025/paper/intro.tex
@@ -102,7 +102,7 @@ comes into play. Historically, people wanting to make an 
anonymous donation
 might have an envelope with cash or a box of goods delivered. Obviously, this
 was never compatible with providing tax benefits. Alternatively, they might
 arrange for an expensive intermediary like a notary (although that would not be
-fully anonymous, and depend on the discretion of the notary).
+fully anonymous and depends on the discretion of the notary).
 
 Technically guaranteed donation confidentiality is certainly
 non-trivial to implement in the digital payment era. What you donate to and why
@@ -111,24 +111,28 @@ uncomfortable number of actors handling sensitive data 
that allows for
 profiling and targeted discrimination on grounds. And there are even more that
 later on may get access to it. Digital payments are logged and made accessible
 to many different actors, and reporting donations to tax authorities adds yet
-(at least) one more actor to the pipeline.  It is the scope of this document to
+(at least) one more actor to the pipeline.  In this work we
 try and solve this issue and finally introduce donation confidentiality which
 adheres to ``privacy by design''.
 
 
 \subsection{Overview of the requirements analysis}
 
-There are two types of donations we will consider. The first is {\em
+There are two types of donations. The first is {\em
   ad hoc} or {\em informal donations}, which are made from individual
-to individual as {\em one time gifts} typically in appreciation of the
+to individual as {\em one time gifts} typically out of spontaneous compassion
+or in appreciation of the
 work being done by an individual or collective. The second category is
 {\em regulated donations} involving at least one {\em recognized}
 philanthropic organization or charity.  Both involve voluntary
 transferal of some financial assets for which no products or services
 are rendered in return.
 % NOTE[oec]: what types of donations are _not_ considered, and why?
+% TL for the first time I'd include ad-hoc donations to beggars or to some
+% collection boxes; that doesn't fit well with the appreciateion but rather
+% with pity or compassion
 
-In the design requirements we will mostly cover donations to charities
+We focus on donations to charities
 which would be eligible for claiming tax benefits as that scenario triggers the
 most complex requirements.
 
@@ -136,9 +140,11 @@ As part of their regular operations as well as their 
recognition as
 public benefit organizations, registered charities are already typically
 subject to a variety of audits as well as strict regulatory and fiscal
 scrutiny. Good causes that do not adhere to these rules are stripped from any
-fiscal benefits. At least donations to recognized public benefit organizations
-may therefore be confidential: donors should be able to freely choose whichever
-of the approved philanthropies they donate to, without disclosing which.
+fiscal benefits. 
+From a regulatory point of view, it should be compliant to have donations to
+recognized public benefit organizations
+be confidential: donors should be able to freely choose whichever
+of the approved philanthropies they donate to, without having to disclose 
which.
 
 We note that in some countries there are different tiers of philanthropies.
 Some countries like Italy and the Netherlands have for instance particular tax
@@ -167,7 +173,8 @@ donor is not inherently traceable via the underlying 
payment.
 
 This paper presents the design and implementation of a donation
 protocol producing digitally signed proofs of donation that are linked
-to the donor but unlinkable to the charity on top of the GNU
+to the donor but unlinkable to the charity.
+The deisn can be used for donations made using the GNU
 Taler~\cite{Taler} payment system.  GNU Taler is a {\em digital
   commons}, based on free software and advanced cryptography. This
 means that -- unlike proprietary products -- anyone can easily extend
@@ -185,7 +192,7 @@ achieving privacy-preserving donations with 
tax-deductability.
 
 \subsection{Approach}
 
-Today, charities issuing donation receipts which generally bear the
+Today, charities issue donation receipts which generally bear the
 name of the charity.  The donor often has to include the donation
 receipts in their tax declaration; this means the tax authority not
 only learns the amount that the tax payer donated to charitable
@@ -211,7 +218,7 @@ additional service separate from the charities and the 
payment system.
 The Donau is responsible for recognizing charitable organizations and
 tracking the total amount of donation receipts each charity is issuing
 for the charitable contributions the charity is receiving.  It is
-typically be expected that each competent tax authority would operate
+typically expected that each competent tax authority would operate
 a Donau for the taxpayers in its domain.  We note that the Donau does
 not receive sensitive private information about donors: privacy is
 achieved using cryptography to unlink proofs of donations from the
@@ -231,7 +238,8 @@ Section~\ref{discussion} explains extensions of the core 
design that
 could be used to address all of the main use-cases.  Many of these
 extensions are simply a matter of proper integration and user
 interface design, while a few presume the existence of a widely
-available digital identity system~\cite{FIXME} providing a single
+available digital identity system, such as citizen ID cards or the European
+identity wallet current being developed,  providing a single
 unlinkable pseudonym for each citizen per charity.
 
 Navigating donation regulations involves adhering to a multitude of
@@ -241,5 +249,5 @@ countries. Compliance ensures trust in the philanthropic 
sector,
 promoting ethical giving practices within a complex regulatory
 landscape.  Cross-border donations are particularly challenging.
 We review some of the legal and regulatory background in
-Appendix~\ref{ap-back}.
+Appendix~\ref{app-back}.
 

-- 
To stop receiving notification emails like this one, please contact
gnunet@gnunet.org.



reply via email to

[Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread]