Perfect Money has a great deal of similarity with a variety of electronic payment systems that are present in the market electronic currency. Each system has at least payer and payee. Transferring money from a payer to a payee provides determined actions – the electronic payment protocol. Theoretically, both sides can communicate directly (modern cryptographic device allows it), but in practice such a scheme is unreliable and it is necessary to inject so-called "financial institutions", which relate an electronic transfer to the real movement of money. In the role of "financial institution" can be a bank, and any other respectable company, which is relied on by participants. By the way, banks are very wary to risky experimentations with virtual cash. Basically, developers of send money online become such financial institutions, which in principle can not support all electronic currency of real money. There is downright emission rights’ excess. In order to somehow smooth out the corners and keep the system from collapse, developers involve more players…

The financial institution receiving money from the payer is called the issuer. And the institution sending currency to payee is acquirer. Issuer and acquirer may transfer by any payment protocol, and even be a single serving and payers and payees. If all the components are united, a payment system is centralized. It weans, firstly, a permanent overloaded central server, and secondly – the undermining of trust to the system (the possibility of opportunistic behavior). That is why the central financial institution typically delegates some of its rights to third-party firm, checking out their work, or do not control. There are as positive as negative sides in controlling. Such checks are good because the center is responsible for everything: if the issuer stole other people’s money, the entire amount will “parent” organization pay. On the other hand, in such a system there is no initiative and lack of competition and that is why the range of services is small…

If control is not existed, work with electronic money can anyone. It is not necessary to get the approval of “center” that is why one can enter any services, only if there is demand for the goods. Lack of any guarantees is the price for such work. If someone has scammed a client, dissatisfied party can apply only to the police, but to seek the return of cash from other players is senseless (though in a free market there are always people who will offer such services, so the situation is not hopeless). In bank system there is the first scheme. The Central Bank watches all the commercial banks and in case of the slightest suspicion immediately satisfiers with the proceedings. And if the bank with all money suddenly disappears, all the debts transferred to the Central Bank. But the range of services remains rudimentary level, as it is controlled by the Central Bank. Electronic payment systems can use either the first or second scheme, or their combination. Then the market will be presented by “trusted” business and “gray” parties, which people rely solely on their own risk. Any payment system should have an arbiter, an independent person to resolve disputed issues and earn from fees. If there is no such an arbiter in payment system or his/her independence declared only conditionally, so such system is too unsafe. It does not concern Perfect Money.

Payments may be direct or indirect. Direct payments imply a direct relationship of payer with an issuer and a payee, and payee’s co-operation with a payer and an acquirer. A payer sends money to a payee, the issuer writes off the sum from his/her account, acquirer adds it to the payee’s account. A classic example of direct payment is a check.

There are indirect systems, in which a payer is associated with an issuer only and a payee – only with acquirer. It is this scheme which wire transfer works by. For such kind of transfers it is not necessary for both parties to be on-line on the same time. In addition, indirect systems are protected more reliable than direct.

However, electronic money is extremely vulnerable. If a hacker is able to implement its own program inside the system, it will be easily for him/her to get all the money keeping in the system. It is possible to try to intercept the communication channel of payer and payee / emitter, taking control of one of the intermediate servers. There are other ways of hacking, so one should be careful using electronic money payment systems.