Execution Guarantees in Electronic Commerce Payments

  • Heiko Schuldt
  • Andrei Popovici
  • Hans-Jörg Schek
Conference paper
Part of the Lecture Notes in Computer Science book series (LNCS, volume 1773)


Electronic Commerce over the Internet is one of the most rapidly growing areas in todays business. However, considering the most important phase of Electronic Commerce, the payment, it has to be noted that in most currently exploited approaches support for at least one of the participants is limited. From a general point of view, a couple of requirements for correct payment interactions exist, namely different levels of atomicity in the exchange of money and goods of a single customer with different merchants. Furthermore, as fraudulent behavior of participants in Electronic Commerce has to be considered, the ability to legally prove the processing of a payment transaction is required. In this paper, we identify the different requirements participants demand on Electronic Commerce payment from the point of view of execution guarantees and present how payment interactions can be implemented by transactional processes. Finally, we show how the maximum level of execution guarantees can be provided for payment processes in a natural way by applying transactional process management to an Electronic Commerce Payment Coordinator.


Payment Server Money Transfer Fraudulent Behavior Transactional Process Payment Process 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.


Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.


  1. 1.
    G. Alonso, S. Blott, A. Feßler, and H.-J. Schek. Correctness and Parallelism in Composite Systems. In Proc. of the 16th ACM SIGACT-SIGMOD-SIGART Symposium on Principles of Database Systems, PODS’97, Tuscon, Arizona, USA, pages 197–208, ACM Press, 1997.Google Scholar
  2. 2.
    G. Alonso, U. Fiedler, C. Hagen, A. Lazcano, H. Schuldt, and N. Weiler. Wise: Business to Business E-Commerce. In Proc. of the 9th Int. Workshop on Research Issues in Data Engineering, Information Technology for Virtual Enterprises, RIDE-VE’99, March 1999, Sydney, Australia, pages 132–139, IEEE Computer Society Press, 1999.Google Scholar
  3. 3.
    J. Camp, M. Harkavy, D. Tygar, and B. Yee. Anonymous Atomic Transactions. In Proc. of the 2nd Usenix Workshop on Electronic Commerce, pages 123–133, 1996.Google Scholar
  4. 4.
    B. Cox, D. Tygar, and M. Sirbu. NetBill Security and Transaction Protocol. In Proc. of the 1st USENIX Workshop on Electronic Commerce, pages 77–88, 1995.Google Scholar
  5. 5.
    DigiCash, 1999.
  6. 6.
    J. Gray and A. Reuter. Transaction Processing: Concepts and Techniques. Morgan Kaufmann, 1993.Google Scholar
  7. 7.
    J. Lyon, K. Evans, and J. Klein. Transaction Internet Protocol Version 3.0. Network Working Group, Request for Comments (RFC 2371), July 1998.
  8. 8.
    MasterCard and Visa. Secure Electronic Transaction Specification. MasterCard and Visa, draft edition, June 1996. Book 1: Business Description, Book 2: Programmer’s Guide, Book 3: Formal Protocol Specification (Slightly revised version of Book 3 appeared August 1, 1997).Google Scholar
  9. 9.
    S. Mehrotra, R. Rastogi, H. F. Korth, and A. Silberschatz. A Transaction Model for Multidatabase Systems. In Proc. of the 12th Int. Conf. on Distributed Computing Systems, ICDCS’92, June 1992, Yokohama, Japan, pages 56–63, IEEE Computer Society Press, 1992.Google Scholar
  10. 10.
    P. Muth, J. Weissenfels, and G. Weikum. What Workflow Technology can do for Electronic Commerce. In Proc. of the EURO-MED NET Conference, March 1998, Nicosia, Cyprus, 1998.Google Scholar
  11. 11.
    B. Schmidt. Electronic Markets — Characteristics, Organization, and Potentials. In A. Hermanns and M. Sauter, editors, Management Handbook Electronic Commerce, Vahlen, 1998. (In German).Google Scholar
  12. 12.
    H. Schuldt, G. Alonso, and H.-J. Schek. Concurrency Control and Recovery in Transactional Process Management. In Proc. of the 18th ACM SIGACT-SIGMOD-SIGART Symposium on Principles of Database Systems, PODS’99, May 31–June 2, 1999, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania, pages 316–326, ACM Press, 1999.Google Scholar
  13. 13.
    H. Schuldt, H.-J. Schek, and G. Alonso. Transactional Coordination Agents for Composite Systems. In Proc. of the 3rd Int. Database Engineering and Applications Symposium, IDEAS’99, August 1999, Montréal, Canada, pages 321–331, 1999.Google Scholar
  14. 14.
    D. Tygar. Atomicity in Electronic Commerce. In Proc. of the 15th Annual ACM Symposium on Principles of Distributed Computing, May 23–26, 1996, Philadelphia, PA, USA, pages 8–26, ACM Press, 1996.Google Scholar
  15. 15.
    D. Tygar. Atomicity versus Anonymity: Distributed Transactions for Electronic Commerce. In A. Gupta, O. Shmueli, and J. Widom, editors, Proc. of the 24st Int. Conf. on Very Large Data Bases, VLDB’98, Ney York City, August 24–27, 1998, pages 1–12, Morgan Kaufmann Publishers, 1998.Google Scholar
  16. 16.
    A. Zhang, M. Nodine, B. Bhargava, and O. Bukhres. Ensuring Relaxed Atomicity for Flexible Transactions in Multidatabase Systems. In Proc. of the 1994 ACM SIGMOD Int. Conf. on Management of Data, Minneapolis, ACM SIGMOD Record, Vol. 23, No. 2, pages 67–78, ACM Press, 1994.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg 2000

Authors and Affiliations

  • Heiko Schuldt
    • 1
  • Andrei Popovici
    • 1
  • Hans-Jörg Schek
    • 1
  1. 1.Database Research Group Institute of Information SystemsETH ZentrumZürichSwitzerland

Personalised recommendations