Is blockchain's potential overhyped?

[nsaspook]

That's a good point, but it is not limited to bitcoin. It could mean the erosion of trust and security in nearly all aspects of civilization. Science Friday did a recent segment about new technologies for making fake videos, good enough to fool almost anyone. I'm willing to hope that the military can keep our nuclear launch codes secure, but in the broader context we are moving in the direction that makes trusted communication an oxymoron.

I think we can build trusted systems (it's mainly public-key cryptography systems based on factoring large numbers that are at risk not all encryption systems "symmetric encryption ciphers ") that resist future computing systems but humans will always be the weak link in the chain of security.
https://csrc.nist.gov/csrc/media/pr...aphy/documents/pqcrypto-2016-presentation.pdf

 

[qspeechc]

The major risk for the current Blockchain implementation is a deep weakness in ECC. (Elliptical curve cryptography)
http://blog.bettercrypto.com/?p=1004
http://blog.bettercrypto.com/?p=1917

There is also the 51% of the network attack.
https://www.investopedia.com/terms/1/51-attack.asp

That's the actual problem with things like Bitcoin, the vast majority of users don't understand it at all, they just like the gains (I'm not claiming I undestand it either).

Anyway, do you work for the NSA?

 

[nsaspook]

That's the actual problem with things like Bitcoin, the vast majority of users don't understand it at all, they just like the gains (I'm not claiming I undestand it either).

Anyway, do you work for the NSA?

No. A long time ago I was a military guy that worked in the field.

 

[FactChecker]

There is also the 51% of the network attack.
https://www.investopedia.com/terms/1/51-attack.asp

This is where bitcoin security is counting on a widely dispersed, large number of bitcoin miners. A smaller application of the blockchain approach may have less security.

 

[nsaspook]

This is where bitcoin security is counting on a widely dispersed, large number of bitcoin miners. A smaller application of the blockchain approach may have less security.

The problem is that bitcoins computing power is not widely dispersed because of the increasing difficulty of mining blocks. When it was possible for some guy with a few mining rigs to break even or make a small amount of money it was a lot more secure. Operations in China controls at least 80% of all Bitcoin blockchain computer power due to cheap dirty power. Bitcoin is not immune to the 80/20 power rule of power concentration over time.
https://blockchain.info/pools
https://www.buybitcoinworldwide.com/mining/china/
https://spectrum.ieee.org/computing/networks/why-the-biggest-bitcoin-mines-are-in-china

It's currently a big financial advantage for the pool miners to keep the system blockchain stable (sometimes to the disadvantage of possible security and performance upgrades) because coins are being awarded for their current investment in systems but that won't always be true.

https://hacken.io/wp-content/uploads/The-Rush-for-Hashpower.pdf

Concentration of power attacks.

 

[Baluncore]

The first big quantum computer will put all other cryptocurrency miners out of business.
Will blockchain technology have to keep ahead of the advancing technology in order to be trusted.
Yesterday there was some news about activity in the Australian Bureau of Meteorology. It did not involve their supercomputers.
http://www.abc.net.au/news/2018-03-...aff-implicated-in-cryptocurrency-ring/9524208

 

[kith]

I've recently read two articles by Kai Stinchcombe. He not only argues that the blockchain is overhyped but also that a future where the blockchain replaces the presently needed trust in people and established institutions would be rather dystopian. Money quotes about these two points:

"In fact, I would assert that there is no single person in existence who had a problem they wanted to solve, discovered that an available blockchain solution was the best way to solve it, and therefore became a blockchain enthusiast."

"It’s not trustless, you’re trusting in the software (and your ability to defend yourself in a software-driven world), instead of trusting other people."