This is a proposal for handing accounts and quotas in Tahoe. Nothing is final
yet.. we are still evaluating the options.


= Accounts =

The basic Tahoe account is defined by a DSA key pair. The holder of the
private key has the ability to consume storage in conjunction with a specific
account number.

The Account Server has a long-term keypair. Valid accounts are marked as such
by the Account Server's signature on a "membership card", which binds a
specific pubkey to an account number and declares that this pair is a valid
account.

Each Storage Server which participages in the AS's domain will have the AS's
pubkey in its list of valid AS keys, and will thus accept membership cards
that were signed by that AS. If the SS accepts multiple ASs, then it will
give each a distinct number, and leases will be labled with an (AS#,Account#)
pair. If there is only one AS, then leases will be labeled with just the
Account#.

Each client node is given the FURL of their personal Account object. The
Account will accept a DSA public key and return a signed membership card that
authorizes the corresponding private key to consume storage on behalf of the
account. The client will create its own DSA keypair the first time it
connects to the Account, and will then use the resulting membership card for
all subsequent storage operations.

== Storage Server Goals ==

The Storage Server cares about two things:

 1: maintaining an accurate refcount on each bucket, so it can delete the
    bucket when the refcount goes to zero
 2: being able to answer questions about aggregate usage per account

The SS conceptually maintains a big matrix of lease information: one column
per account, one row per storage index. The cells contain a boolean
(has-lease or no-lease). If the grid uses per-lease timers, then each
has-lease cell also contains a lease timer.

This matrix may be stored in a variety of ways: entries in each share file,
or items in a SQL database, according to the desired tradeoff between
complexity, robustness, read speed, and write speed.

Each client (by virtue of their knowledge of an authorized private key) gets
to manipulate their column of this matrix in any way they like: add lease,
renew lease, delete lease. (TODO: for reconcilliation purposes, the should
also be able to enumerate leases).

== Storage Operations ==

Side-effect-causing storage operations come in three forms:

 1: allocate bucket / add lease to existing bucket
     arguments: storage_index=, storage_server=, ueb_hash=, account=
 2: renew lease
     arguments: storage_index=, storage_server=, account=
 3: cancel lease
     arguments: storage_index=, storage_server=, account=

(where lease renewal is only relevant for grids which use per-lease timers).
Clients do add-lease when they upload a file, and cancel-lease when they
remove their last reference to it.

Storage Servers publish a "public storage port" through the introducer, which
does not actually enable storage operations, but is instead used in a
rights-amplification pattern to grant authorized parties access to a
"personal storage server facet". This personal facet is the one that
implements allocate_bucket. All clients get access to the same public storage
port, which means that we can improve the introduction mechanism later (to
use a gossip-based protocol) without affecting the authority-granting
protocols.

The public storage port accepts signed messages asking for storage authority.
It responds by creating a personal facet and making it available to the
requester. The account number is curried into the facet, so that all
lease-creating operations will record this account number into the lease. By
restricting the nature of the personal facets that a client can access, we
restrict them to using their designated account number.


========================================

There are two kinds of signed messages: use (other names: connection,
FURLification, activation, reification, grounding, specific-making, ?), and
delegation. The FURLification message results in a FURL that points to an
object which can actually accept RIStorageServer methods. The delegation
message results in a new signed message.

The furlification message looks like:

 (pubkey, signed(serialized({limitations}, beneficiary_furl)))

The delegation message looks like:

 (pubkey, signed(serialized({limitations}, delegate_pubkey)))

The limitations dict indicates what the resulting connection or delegation
can be used for. All limitations for the cert chain are applied, and the
result must be restricted to their overall minimum.

The following limitation keys are defined:

 'account': a number. All resulting leases must be tagged with this account
            number. A chain with multiple distinct 'account' limitations is
            an error (the result will not permit leases)
 'SI': a storage index (binary string). Leases may only be created for this
       specific storage index, no other.
 'serverid': a peerid (binary string). Leases may only be created on the
             storage server identified by this serverid.
 'UEB_hash': (binary string): Leases may only be created for shares which
             contain a matching UEB_hash. Note: this limitation is a nuisance
             to implement correctly: it requires that the storage server
             parse the share and verify all hashes.
 'before': a timestamp (seconds since epoch). All leases must be made before
           this time. In addition, all liverefs and FURLs must expire and
           cease working at this time.
 'server_size': a number, measuring share size (in bytes). A storage server
                which sees this message should keep track of how much storage
                space has been consumed using this liveref/FURL, and throw
                an exception when receiving a lease request that would bring
                this total above 'server_size'. Note: this limitation is
                a nuisance to implement (it works best if 'before' is used
                and provides a short lifetime).

Actually, let's merge the two, and put the type in the limitations dict.
'furl_to' and 'delegate_key' are mutually exclusive.

 'furl_to': (string): Used only on furlification messages. This requests the
            recipient to create an object which implements the given access,
            then send a FURL which references this object to an
            RIFURLReceiver.furl() call at the given 'furl_to' FURL:
               facet = create_storage_facet(limitations)
               facet_furl = tub.registerReference(facet)
               d = tub.getReference(limitations['furl_to'])
               d.addCallback(lambda rref: rref.furl(facet_furl))
            The facet_furl should be persistent, so to reduce storage space,
            facet_furl should contain an HMAC'ed list of all limitations, and
            create_storage_facet() should be deferred until the client
            actually tries to use the furl. This leads to 150-200 byte base32
            swissnums.
 'delegate_key': (binary string, a DSA pubkey). Used only on delegation
                 messages. This requests all observers to accept messages
                 signed by the given public key and to apply the associated
                 limitations.

I also want to keep the message size small, so I'm going to define a custom
netstring-based encoding format for it (JSON expands binary data by about
3.5x). Each dict entry will be encoded as netstring(key)+netstring(value).
The container is responsible for providing the size of this serialized
structure.

The actual message will then look like:

def make_message(privkey, limitations):
  message_to_sign = "".join([ netstring(k) + netstring(v) 
                              for k,v in limitations ])
  signature = privkey.sign(message_to_sign)
  pubkey = privkey.get_public_key()
  msg = netstring(message_to_sign) + netstring(signature) + netstring(pubkey)
  return msg

The deserialization code MUST throw an exception if the same limitations key
appears twice, to ensure that everybody interprets the dict the same way.

These messages are passed over foolscap connections as a single string. They
are also saved to disk in this format. Code should only store them in a
deserialized form if the signature has been verified, the cert chain
verified, and the limitations accumulated.


The membership card is just the following:

 membership_card = make_message(account_server_privkey,
                                {'account': account_number,
                                 'before': time.time() + 1*MONTH,
                                 'delegate_key': client_pubkey})

This card is provided on demand by the given user's Account facet, for
whatever pubkey they submit.

When a client learns about a new storage server, they create a new receiver
object (and stash the peerid in it), and submit the following message to the
RIStorageServerWelcome.get_personal_facet() method:

 mymsg = make_message(client_privkey, {'furl_to': receiver_furl})
 send(membership_card, mymsg)

(note that the receiver_furl will probably not have a routeable address, but
this won't matter because the client is already attached, so foolscap can use
the existing connection.)

The server will validate the cert chain (see below) and wind up with a
complete list of limitations that are to be applied to the facet it will
provide to the caller. This list must combine limitations from the entire
chain: in particular it must enforce the account= limitation from the
membership card.

The server will then serialize this limitation dict into a string, compute a
fixed-size HMAC code using a server-private secret, then base32 encode the
(hmac+limitstring) value (and prepend a "0-" version indicator). The
resulting string is used as the swissnum portion of the FURL that is sent to
the furl_to target.

Later, when the client tries to dereference this FURL, a
Tub.registerNameLookupHandler hook will notice the attempt, claim the "0-"
namespace, base32decode the string, check the HMAC, decode the limitation
dict, then create and return an RIStorageServer facet with these limitations.

The client should cache the (peerid, FURL) mapping in persistent storage.
Later, when it learns about this storage server again, it will use the cached
FURL instead of signing another message. If the getReference or the storage
operation fails with StorageAuthorityExpiredError, the cache entry should be
removed and the client should sign a new message to obtain a new one.

 (security note: an evil storage server can take 'mymsg' and present it to
 someone else, but other servers will only send the resulting authority to
 the client's receiver_furl, so the evil server cannot benefit from this. The
 receiver object has the serverid curried into it, so the evil server can
 only affect the client's mapping for this one serverid, not anything else,
 so the server cannot hurt the client in any way other than denying service
 to itself. It might be a good idea to include serverid= in the message, but
 it isn't clear that it really helps anything).

When the client wants to use a Helper, it needs to delegate some amount of
storage authority to the helper. The first phase has the client send the
storage index to the helper, so it can query servers and decide whether the
file needs to be uploaded or not. If it decides yes, the Helper creates a new
Uploader object and a receiver object, and sends the Uploader liveref and the
receiver FURL to the client.

The client then creates a message for the helper to use:

 helper_msg = make_message(client_privkey, {'furl_to': helper_rx_furl,
                                            'SI': storage_index,
                                            'before': time.time() + 1*DAY, #?
                                            'server_size': filesize/k+overhead,
                                            })

The client then sends (membership_card, helper_msg) to the helper. The Helper
sends (membership_card, helper_msg) to each storage server that it needs to
use for the upload. This gives the Helper access to a limited facet on each
storage server. This facet gives the helper the authority to upload data for
a specific storage index, for a limited time, using leases that are tagged by
the user's account number. The helper cannot use the client's storage
authority for any other file. The size limit prevents the helper from storing
some other (larger) file of its own using this authority. The time
restriction allows the storage servers to expire their 'server_size' table
entry quickly, and prevents the helper from hanging on to the storage
authority indefinitely.

The Helper only gets one furl_to target, which must be used for multiple SS
peerids. The helper's receiver must parse the FURL that gets returned to
determine which server is which. [problems: an evil server could deliver a
bogus FURL which points to a different server. The Helper might reject the
real server's good FURL as a duplicate. This allows an evil server to block
access to a good server. Queries could be sent sequentially, which would
partially mitigate this problem (an evil server could send multiple
requests). Better: if the cert-chain send message could include a nonce,
which is supposed to be returned with the FURL, then the helper could use
this to correlate sends and receives.]

=== repair caps ===

There are three basic approaches to provide a Repairer with the storage
authority that it needs. The first is to give the Repairer complete
authority: allow it to place leases for whatever account number it wishes.
This is simple and requires the least overhead, but of course it give the
Repairer the ability to abuse everyone's quota. The second is to give the
Repairer no user authority: instead, give the repairer its own account, and
build it to keep track of which leases it is holding on behalf of one of its
customers. This repairer will slowly accumulate quota space over time, as it
creates new shares to replace ones that have decayed. Eventually, when the
client comes back online, the client should establish its own leases on these
new shares and allow the repairer to cancel its temporary ones.

The third approach is in between the other two: give the repairer some
limited authority over the customer's account, but not enough to let it
consume the user's whole quota.

To create the storage-authority portion of a (one-month) repair-cap, the
client creates a new DSA keypair (repair_privkey, repair_pubkey), and then
creates a signed message and bundles it into the repaircap:

 repair_msg = make_message(client_privkey, {'delegate_key': repair_pubkey,
                                            'SI': storage_index,
                                            'UEB_hash': file_ueb_hash})
 repair_cap = (verify_cap, repair_privkey, (membership_card, repair_msg))

This gives the holder of the repair cap a time-limited authority to upload
shares for the given storage index which contain the given data. This
prohibits the repair-cap from being used to upload or repair any other file.

When the repairer needs to upload a new share, it will use the delegated key
to create its own signed message:

 upload_msg = make_message(repair_privkey, {'furl_to': repairer_rx_furl})
 send(membership_card, repair_msg, upload_msg)

The biggest problem with the low-authority approaches is the expiration time
of the membership card, which limits the duration for which the repair-cap
authority is valid. It would be nice if repair-caps could last a long time,
years perhaps, so that clients can be offline for a similar period of time.
However to retain a reasonable revocation interval for users, the membership
card's before= timeout needs to be closer to a month. [it might be reasonable
to use some sort of rights-amplification: the repairer has a special cert
which allows it to remove the before= value from a chain].


=== chain verification ===

The server will create a chain that starts with the AS's certificate: an
unsigned message which derives its authority from being manually placed in
the SS's configdir. The only limitation in the AS certificate will be on some
kind of meta-account, in case we want to use multiple account servers and
allow their account numbers to live in distinct number spaces (think
sub-accounts or business partners to buy storage in bulk and resell it to
users). The rest of the chain comes directly from what the client sent.

The server walks the chain, keeping an accumulated limitations dictionary
along the way. At each step it knows the pubkey that was delegated by the
previous step.

== client config ==

Clients are configured with an Account FURL that points to a private facet on
the Account Server. The client generates a private key at startup. It sends
the pubkey to the AS facet, which will return a signed delegate_key message
(the "membership card") that grants the client's privkey any storage
authority it wishes (as long as the account number is set to a specific
value).

The client stores this membership card in private/membership.cert .


RIStorageServer messages will accept an optional account= argument. If left
unspecified, the value is taken from the limitations that were curried into
the SS facet. In all cases, the value used must meet those limitations. The
value must not be None: Helpers/Repairers or other super-powered storage
clients are obligated to specify an account number.

== server config ==

Storage servers are configured with an unsigned root authority message. This
is like the output of make_message(account_server_privkey, {}) but has empty
'signature' and 'pubkey' strings. This root goes into
NODEDIR/storage_authority_root.cert . It is prepended to all chains that
arrive.

 [if/when we accept multiple authorities, storage_authority_root.cert will
  turn into a storage_authority_root/ directory with *.cert files, and each
  arriving chain will cause a search through these root certs for a matching
  pubkey. The empty limitations will be replaced by {domain=X}, which is used
  as a sort of meta-account.. the details depend upon whether we express
  account numbers as an int (with various ranges) or as a tuple]

The root authority message is published by the Account Server through its web
interface, and also into a local file: NODEDIR/storage_authority_root.cert .
The admin of the storage server is responsible for copying this file into
place, thus enabling clients to use storage services.


----------------------------------------

-- Text beyond this point is out-of-date, and exists purely for background --

Each storage server offers a "public storage port", which only accepts signed
messages. The Introducer mechanism exists to give clients a reference to a
set of these public storage ports. All clients get access to the same ports.
If clients did all their work themselves, these public storage ports would be
enough, and no further code would be necessary (all storage requests would we
signed the same way).

Fundamentally, each storage request must be signed by the account's private
key, giving the SS an authenticated Account Number to go with the request.
This is used to index the correct cell in the lease matrix. The holder of the
account privkey is allowed to manipulate their column of the matrix in any
way they like: add leases, renew leases, delete leases. (TODO: for
reconcilliation purposes, they should also be able to enumerate leases). The
storage request is sent in the form of a signed request message, accompanied
by the membership card. For example:

 req = SIGN("allocate SI=123 SSID=abc", accountprivkey) , membership_card
  -> RemoteBucketWriter reference

Upon receipt of this request, the storage server will return a reference to a
RemoteBucketWriter object, which the client can use to fill and close the
bucket. The SS must perform two DSA signature verifications before accepting
this request. The first is to validate the membership card: the Account
Server's pubkey is used to verify the membership card's signature, from which
an account pubkey and account# is extracted. The second is to validate the
request: the account pubkey is used to verify the request signature. If both
are valid, the full request (with account# and storage index) is delivered to
the internal StorageServer object.

Note that the signed request message includes the Storage Server's node ID,
to prevent this storage server from taking the signed message and echoing to
other storage servers. Each SS will ignore any request that is not addressed
to the right SSID. Also note that the SI= and SSID= fields may contain
wildcards, if the signing client so chooses.

== Caching Signature Verification ==

We add some complexity to this simple model to achieve two goals: to enable
fine-grained delegation of storage capabilities (specifically for renewers
and repairers), and to reduce the number of public-key crypto operations that
must be performed.

The first enhancement is to allow the SS to cache the results of the
verification step. To do this, the client creates a signed message which asks
the SS to return a FURL of an object which can be used to execute further
operations *without* a DSA signature. The FURL is expected to contain a
MAC'ed string that contains the account# and the argument restrictions,
effectively currying a subset of arguments into the RemoteReference. Clients
which do all their operations themselves would use this to obtain a private
storage port for each public storage port, stashing the FURLs in a local
table, and then later storage operations would be done to those FURLs instead
of creating signed requests. For example:

 req = SIGN("FURL(allocate SI=* SSID=abc)", accountprivkey), membership_card
  -> FURL
 Tub.getReference(FURL).allocate(SI=123) -> RemoteBucketWriter reference

== Renewers and Repairers

A brief digression is in order, to motivate the other enhancement. The
"manifest" is a list of caps, one for each node that is reachable from the
user's root directory/directories. The client is expected to generate the
manifest on a periodic basis (perhaps once a day), and to keep track of which
files/dirnodes have been added and removed. Items which have been removed
must be explicitly dereferenced to reclaim their storage space. For grids
which use per-file lease timers, the manifest is used to drive the Renewer: a
process which renews the lease timers on a periodic basis (perhaps once a
week). The manifest can also be used to drive a Checker, which in turn feeds
work into the Repairer.

The manifest should contain the minimum necessary authority to do its job,
which generally means it contains the "verify cap" for each node. For
immutable files, the verify cap contains the storage index and the UEB hash:
enough information to retrieve and validate the ciphertext but not enough to
decrypt it. For mutable files, the verify cap contains the storage index and
the pubkey hash, which also serves to retrieve and validate ciphertext but
not decrypt it.

If the client does its own Renewing and Repairing, then a verifycap-based
manifest is sufficient. However, if the user wants to be able to turn their
computer off for a few months and still keep their files around, they need to
delegate this job off to some other willing node. In a commercial network,
there will be centralized (and perhaps trusted) Renewer/Repairer nodes, but
in a friendnet these may not be available, and the user will depend upon one
of their friends being willing to run this service for them while they are
away. In either of these cases, the verifycaps are not enough: the Renewer
will need additional authority to renew the client's leases, and the Repairer
will need the authority to create new shares (in the client's name) when
necessary.

A trusted central service could be given all-account superpowers, allowing it
to exercise storage authority on behalf of all users as it pleases. If this
is the case, the verifycaps are sufficient. But if we desire to grant less
authority to the Renewer/Repairer, then we need a mechanism to attenuate this
authority.

The usual objcap approach is to create a proxy: an intermediate object which
itself is given full authority, but which is unwilling to exercise more than
a portion of that authority in response to incoming requests. The
not-fully-trusted service is then only given access to the proxy, not the
final authority. For example:

 class Proxy(RemoteReference):
   def __init__(self, original, storage_index):
     self.original = original
     self.storage_index = storage_index
   def remote_renew_leases(self):
     return self.original.renew_leases(self.storage_index)
 renewer.grant(Proxy(target, "abcd"))

But this approach interposes the proxy in the calling chain, requiring the
machine which hosts the proxy to be available and on-line at all times, which
runs opposite to our use case (turning the client off for a month).

== Creating Attenuated Authorities ==

The other enhancement is to use more public-key operations to allow the
delegation of reduced authority to external helper services. Specifically, we
want to give then Renewer the ability to renew leases for a specific file,
rather than giving it lease-renewal power for all files. Likewise, the
Repairer should have the ability to create new shares, but only for the file
that is being repaired, not for unrelated files.

If we do not mind giving the storage servers the ability to replay their
inbound message to other storage servers, then the client can simply generate
a signed message with a wildcard SSID= argument and leave it in the care of
the Renewer or Repairer. For example, the Renewer would get:

 SIGN("renew-lease SI=123 SSID=*", accountprivkey), membership_card

Then, when the Renewer needed to renew a lease, it would deliver this signed
request message to the storage server. The SS would verify the signatures
just as if the message came from the original client, find them good, and
perform the desired operation. With this approach, the manifest that is
delivered to the remote Renewer process needs to include a signed
lease-renewal request for each file: we use the term "renew-cap" for this
combined (verifycap + signed lease-renewal request) message. Likewise the
"repair-cap" would be the verifycap plus a signed allocate-bucket message. A
renew-cap manifest would be enough for a remote Renewer to do its job, a
repair-cap manifest would provide a remote Repairer with enough authority,
and a cancel-cap manifest would be used for a remote Canceller (used, e.g.,
to make sure that file has been dereferenced even if the client does not
stick around long enough to track down and inform all of the storage servers
involved).

The only concern is that the SS could also take this exact same renew-lease
message and deliver it to other storage servers. This wouldn't cause a
concern for mere lease renewal, but the allocate-share message might be a bit
less comfortable (you might not want to grant the first storage server the
ability to claim space in your name on all other storage servers).

Ideally we'd like to send a different message to each storage server, each
narrowed in scope to a single SSID, since then none of these messages would
be useful on any other SS. If the client knew the identities of all the
storage servers in the system ahead of time, it might create a whole slew of
signed messages, but a) this is a lot of signatures, only a fraction of which
will ever actually be used, and b) new servers might be introduced after the
manifest is created, particularly if we're talking about repair-caps instead
of renewal-caps. The Renewer can't generate these one-per-SSID messages from
the SSID=* message, because it doesn't have a privkey to make the correct
signatures. So without some other mechanism, we're stuck with these
relatively coarse authorities.

If we want to limit this sort of authority, then we need to introduce a new
method. The client begins by generating a new DSA keypair. Then it signs a
message that declares the new pubkey to be valid for a specific subset of
storage operations (such as "renew-lease SI=123 SSID=*"). Then it delivers
the new privkey, the declaration message, and the membership card to the
Renewer. The renewer uses the new privkey to sign its own one-per-SSID
request message for each server, then sends the (signed request, declaration,
membership card) triple to the server. The server needs to perform three
verification checks per message: first the membership card, then the
declaration message, then the actual request message.

== Other Enhancements ==

If a given authority is likely to be used multiple times, the same
give-me-a-FURL trick can be used to cut down on the number of public key
operations that must be performed. This is trickier with the per-SI messages.

When storing the manifest, things like the membership card should be
amortized across a set of common entries. An isolated renew-cap needs to
contain the verifycap, the signed renewal request, and the membership card.
But a manifest with a thousand entries should only include one copy of the
membership card.

It might be sensible to define a signed renewal request that grants authority
for a set of storage indicies, so that the signature can be shared among
several entries (to save space and perhaps processing time). The request
could include a Bloom filter of authorized SI values: when the request is
actually sent to the server, the renewer would add a list of actual SI values
to renew, and the server would accept all that are contained in the filter.

== Revocation ==

The lifetime of the storage authority included in the manifest's renew-caps
or repair-caps will determine the lifetime of those caps. In particular, if
we implement account revocation by using time-limited membership cards
(requiring the client to get a new card once a month), then the repair-caps
won't work for more than a month, which kind of defeats the purpose.

A related issue is the FURL-shortcut: the MAC'ed message needs to include a
validity period of some sort, and if the client tries to use a old FURL they
should get an error message that will prompt them to try and acquire a newer
one.

------------------------------

The client can produce a repair-cap manifest for a specific Repairer's
pubkey, so it can produce a signed message that includes the pubkey (instead
of needing to generate a new privkey just for this purpose). The result is
not a capability, since it can only be used by the holder of the
corresponding privkey.

So the generic form of the storage operation message is the request (which
has all the argument values filled in), followed by a chain of
authorizations. The first authorization must be signed by the Account
Server's key. Each authorization must be signed by the key mentioned in the
previous one. Each one adds a new limitation on the power of the following
ones. The actual request is bounded by all the limitations of the chain.

The membership card is an authorization that simply limits the account number
that can be used: "op=* SI=* SSID=* account=4 signed-by=CLIENT-PUBKEY".

So a repair manifest created for a Repairer with pubkey ABCD could consist of
a list of verifycaps plus a single authorization (using a Bloom filter to
identify the SIs that were allowed):

 SIGN("allocate SI=[bloom] SSID=* signed-by=ABCD")

If/when the Repairer needed to allocate a share, it would use its own privkey
to sign an additional message and send the whole list to the SS:

 request=allocate SI=1234 SSID=EEFS account=4 shnum=2
 SIGN("allocate SI=1234 SSID=EEFS", ABCD)
 SIGN("allocate SI=[bloom] SSID=* signed-by=ABCD", clientkey)
 membership: SIGN("op=* SI=* SSID=* account=4 signed-by=clientkey", ASkey)
 [implicit]: ASkey

----------------------------------------

Things would be a lot simpler if the Repairer (actually the Re-Leaser) had
everybody's account authority.

One simplifying approach: the Repairer/Re-Leaser has its own account, and the
shares it creates are leased under that account number. The R/R keeps track
of which leases it has created for whom. When the client eventually comes
back online, it is told to perform a re-leasing run, and after that occurs
the R/R can cancel its own temporary leases.

This would effectively transfer storage quota from the original client to the
R/R over time (as shares are regenerated by the R/R while the client remains
offline). If the R/R is centrally managed, the quota mechanism can sum the
R/R's numbers with the SS's numbers when determining how much storage is
consumed by any given account. Not quite as clean as storing the exact
information in the SS's lease tables directly, but:

 * the R/R no longer needs any special account authority (it merely needs an
   accurate account number, which can be supplied by giving the client a
   specific facet that is bound to that account number)
 * the verify-cap manifest is sufficient to perform repair
 * no extra DSA keys are necessary
 * account authority could be implemented with either DSA keys or personal SS
   facets: i.e. we don't need the delegability aspects of DSA keys for use by
   the repair mechanism (we might still want them to simplify introduction).

I *think* this would eliminate all that complexity of chained authorization
messages.
