Notes from BSC telecon Tuesday, February 7 ("trust tree" slide attached)
http://kantarainitiative.org/confluence/display/BSC/2017-02+%28February+2017... Agenda: - Report https://docs.google.com/document/d/1HOVJ3lKqOIjwCqPt5jFxfLr7wEoJ0ZVNbMGsdsWz... work Attending: Eve, Thomas, Kathleen, JohnW, Matisse, Marco, Susan, Adrian, Jeff Discussion of Jeff's critique/comments: - Is the challenge with the phrase "blockchain technology" that it is being taken to apply only to the specific encryption technique? It appears so. We discussed how there are two uses of the phrase "blockchain", where a preponderance of the world uses "blockchain" to mean the entirety of the set of technologies; Jeff is using it to mean just some subset involving encryption. Matisse's professor taught her that "In traditional finance, the bank sends an encrypted transaction between clear people, while in Bitcoin, the bank sends a clear transaction between encrypted people." We edited our Blockchain technology section slightly to make clear that we mean "the whole, not the part". - Does the ethical diamond use case get in our way because the diamond miners have challenges that other use cases https://www.provenance.org/news/category/technology/ wouldn't, such as high-value pharmaceuticals or luxury goods? See this story https://www.provenance.org/news/technology/blockchains-and-human-rights/ on blockchain and human rights. Susan will reach out to Everledger to ask a few questions about the workers involved in the diamond case and Eve will reach out to Vchain to ask them to fill out a questionnaire regarding their border control (not "human empowerment") use case. - What impact is there on OPAL/Enigma in thinking about where data is stored: central servers vs. distributed servers vs. clients? Enigma is on distributed servers; all the nodes act as a data server; the data is encrypted into shares. OPAL simply means moving the queries to the data. You can accept (consent to) algorithms running over your data. - We're all in agreement that the key problems of identity, such as verification/proofing, credential linking, etc., are not solved by blockchain itself. AIs: - Susan above - Eve above - Eve to send out PPT - Jeff to comment on the doc from his "new eyes" perspective *Eve Maler*ForgeRock Office of the CTO | VP Innovation & Emerging Technology Cell +1 425.345.6756 | Skype: xmlgrrl | Twitter: @xmlgrrl
As a followup to today's discussion, note this report I just came across:
Top 10 Mistakes in Enterprise Blockchain Projects
http://www.gartner.com/smarterwithgartner/top-10-mistakes-in-enterprise-bloc...
Several of the items are interesting. #1 especially is generally confirming
of our "trust tree" discussion (see the slide I attached to the meeting
minutes):
"*Misunderstanding or ignoring the purpose of blockchain technology*
For a project to utilize blockchain technology effectively, it must add
trust to an untrusted environment and exploit a distributed ledger
mechanism. Private blockchain deployments relax the security conditions in
favor of a centralized identity management system and consensus mechanism
that obviates the trustless assumptions. To correct this, enterprises must
create a trust model of the entire system to identify trusted areas versus
not-trusted areas and apply blockchain only to the untrusted parties."
*Eve Maler*ForgeRock Office of the CTO | VP Innovation & Emerging Technology
Cell +1 425.345.6756 | Skype: xmlgrrl | Twitter: @xmlgrrl
On Tue, Feb 7, 2017 at 3:58 PM, Eve Maler
http://kantarainitiative.org/confluence/display/BSC/2017- 02+%28February+2017%29+Meetings#id-2017-02(February2017)Meetings-Tuesday, February7
Agenda:
- Report https://docs.google.com/document/d/1HOVJ3lKqOIjwCqPt5jFxfLr7wEoJ0ZVNbMGsdsWz... work
Attending: Eve, Thomas, Kathleen, JohnW, Matisse, Marco, Susan, Adrian, Jeff
Discussion of Jeff's critique/comments:
- Is the challenge with the phrase "blockchain technology" that it is being taken to apply only to the specific encryption technique? It appears so. We discussed how there are two uses of the phrase "blockchain", where a preponderance of the world uses "blockchain" to mean the entirety of the set of technologies; Jeff is using it to mean just some subset involving encryption. Matisse's professor taught her that "In traditional finance, the bank sends an encrypted transaction between clear people, while in Bitcoin, the bank sends a clear transaction between encrypted people." We edited our Blockchain technology section slightly to make clear that we mean "the whole, not the part". - Does the ethical diamond use case get in our way because the diamond miners have challenges that other use cases https://www.provenance.org/news/category/technology/ wouldn't, such as high-value pharmaceuticals or luxury goods? See this story https://www.provenance.org/news/technology/blockchains-and-human-rights/ on blockchain and human rights. Susan will reach out to Everledger to ask a few questions about the workers involved in the diamond case and Eve will reach out to Vchain to ask them to fill out a questionnaire regarding their border control (not "human empowerment") use case. - What impact is there on OPAL/Enigma in thinking about where data is stored: central servers vs. distributed servers vs. clients? Enigma is on distributed servers; all the nodes act as a data server; the data is encrypted into shares. OPAL simply means moving the queries to the data. You can accept (consent to) algorithms running over your data. - We're all in agreement that the key problems of identity, such as verification/proofing, credential linking, etc., are not solved by blockchain itself.
AIs:
- Susan above - Eve above - Eve to send out PPT - Jeff to comment on the doc from his "new eyes" perspective
*Eve Maler*ForgeRock Office of the CTO | VP Innovation & Emerging Technology Cell +1 425.345.6756 <(425)%20345-6756> | Skype: xmlgrrl | Twitter: @xmlgrrl
On the call today we discussed, at the urging of Kathleen, my proposed use-case for using blockchain for evidence notebooks. The details can be found at my blog: https://healthcaresecprivacy.blogspot.com/2016/08/blockchain-and-smart-contr... I gladly submit this for consideration. I have an older submission for anonymous pseudonyms for healthcare data research. It isn't as well defined, but is available here: https://healthcaresecprivacy.blogspot.com/2016/05/healthcare-blockchain-big-... John John Moehrke Principal Engineering Architect: Standards - Interoperability, Privacy, and Security CyberPrivacy – Enabling authorized communications while respecting Privacy M +1 920-564-2067 JohnMoehrke@gmail.com https://www.linkedin.com/in/johnmoehrke https://healthcaresecprivacy.blogspot.com "Quis custodiet ipsos custodes?" ("Who watches the watchers?")
Thanks, John! Noted for inclusion.
*Eve Maler*ForgeRock Office of the CTO | VP Innovation & Emerging Technology
Cell +1 425.345.6756 | Skype: xmlgrrl | Twitter: @xmlgrrl
On Tue, Feb 14, 2017 at 8:04 AM, John Moehrke
On the call today we discussed, at the urging of Kathleen, my proposed use-case for using blockchain for evidence notebooks. The details can be found at my blog: https://healthcaresecprivacy.blogspot. com/2016/08/blockchain-and-smart-contracts-applied.html
I gladly submit this for consideration.
I have an older submission for anonymous pseudonyms for healthcare data research. It isn't as well defined, but is available here: https:// healthcaresecprivacy.blogspot.com/2016/05/healthcare- blockchain-big-data.html
John
John Moehrke Principal Engineering Architect: Standards - Interoperability, Privacy, and Security CyberPrivacy – Enabling authorized communications while respecting Privacy M +1 920-564-2067 <(920)%20564-2067> JohnMoehrke@gmail.com https://www.linkedin.com/in/johnmoehrke https://healthcaresecprivacy.blogspot.com "Quis custodiet ipsos custodes?" ("Who watches the watchers?")
Folks Both Eve and myself are out today, so we are canceling today's BSC telecon. Talk to you all next week. Best Eve & Thomas
participants (3)
-
Eve Maler -
John Moehrke -
Thomas Hardjono