Subnostr

Whilst the idea of a 'private' blockchain is *almost* ridiculous, and a non-sequitur, it isn't quite; google introduced Certificate Transparency about a decade ago, and from my limited understanding, it is a pretty useful construct, as it allows key revocations/updates to be propagated much more efficiently.

You don't have to call it a 'blockchain' but it's a very similar design/protocol.

As CT descriptions make clear (see certificate.transparency.dev ), there should be some element of distributedness, though, for that construct to have value. I don't know if or how that applies to protonmail. Without that, you can still have non-repudiable update and public transparency, but it's harder to see much value. A bit tricky.

sommerfeld 1y ago

Thanks for the insight!

If it's a publicly auditable centralized database, I see the value in it, although limited.

Without 3rd parties auditing changes, does it have any value in practice?

Even then, can't they just reset the whole chain at any time or roll it back? Seems pointless if that's the case

Reply to this note

Please Login to reply.

Discussion

waxwing 1y ago

There's a little blurb on the CT website about how you can run your own nodes.

No idea how it all works in practice. I guess it's like a signet and they just never roll back?

KentuckyChicken 1y ago

That's the problem with every "block chain" app. There always only one node. There is no incentive to run a node. So no one does.

It ends up being just a database with extra steps.