, Thank you for the explanation. As far as i'm concerned, for ETH, the structure for its blockchain is embedded in a Merkel tree. By doing so, for each new block to be written into the chain, its hash value can be validated by POW algorithm in order for the chain to be consistent. I understand the definition of this POA, but i don't understand how such algorithm can be correlated with the hash value format where traditional blockchain were using, i.e. BTC and ETH. I guess for each of those chosen validator in POA algorithm, it will be entitled with a certain amount of mining power, otherwise, how could the blockchain be maintained? if no extra mining power is needed, then how could the validator maintain its writing status in the computing world (using some license or API), in perspective of cybersecurity?What does it mean by the POA mechanism? How could it be used to secure the application in education and travel business?
Thank you Lantern_NPT for your question 🙋🙋
AmberTime will be a Consortium Chain - one difference from the public chain is that the owners / operators of the nodes will not be anonymous.
The ecosystem itself however will be open to the public to participate and access.
PoA stands for "Proof-of-Authority" - a sort of word-play on the other mechanisms such as "Proof-of-Work" (PoW) and "Proof-of-Stake" (PoS).
Proof-of-Authority is the consensus mechanism in which the nodes validating blocks are the ones explicitly allowed to do so. PoA is a modified form of PoS where instead of stake with the monetary value, a validator’s identity performs the role of stake in the form of reputation. In this context, identity means the correspondence between a validator’s personal identification on the platform with officially issued documentation for the same person, organization or institution, to ascertain that a validator is exactly who it represents to be. This is a way to preserve the staking concept, with scarcity and measurability of stake, while ensuring that all who place that stake value it similarly, regardless of other circumstances.
Even if one steals a license and somehow becomes a validator pretending to be someone else, the fact that staking is public will expose a nefarious actor. A single actor with a hacked authority does not have the capacity to overwhelm the network and revert all transactions. Therefore, requiring validators to have an approver public license makes identity impossible to conceal, while a concerned party can easily cross-verify identity in publicly available open domain. With on-chain governance making it simple to oust a non-conforming validator, losing a validator’s role eligibility is public and published in the network. With their real names at stake, validators are unlikely to act nefariously to threaten their own social standing in the real world and virtual community of the blockchain network.
In AmberTime's context, this means that there will be "Authority" nodes within the chain are preregistered and verified entities, and each of them is an organization with a proud reputation to protect, such as universities, government agencies, law firms, businesses, travel agencies etc.
Each transaction in AmberTime would be signed by a randomly selected and voted upon by set of Authority nodes.
Since the organization's reputation is at stake, the risk of a malicious signer is reduced to minimum, and in such an unlikely event, an erring signer would be voted out by the network automatically, and can only be reinstated manually by AmberTime after thorough investigation.
Hope this helps!
Added info: Known successful examples of PoA implementations are Kovan and Rinkeby, the two Ethereum testnets named after metro train stations, which were introduced as new blockchain based on Ethereum protocol with Proof of Authority consensus. Spam attack on the original Ropsten testnet was the reason to create a new public test network. Based on data gathered on both testnets, PoA Networks provides inexpensive consensus to secure the network. Users can run Ethereum programs on Kovan and Rinkeby and spend less money on transaction fees which also translates to the network's security will also be cheaper to maintain.
