Blockchain also has potential applications far beyond bitcoin and cryptocurrency. Blockchain is, quite simply, a digital, decentralized ledger that keeps a record of all transactions that take place across a peer-to-peer network. ... For an overview of cryptocurrency, start with “Money is no object.”
The whole point of using a blockchain is to let people—in particular, people who don't trust one another—share valuable data in a secure, tamperproof way. ... In Bitcoin's blockchain, the shared data is the history of every Bitcoin transaction ever made: an accounting ledger.
Topic: Is blockchain really needed for security? (Read 484 times)
I really think it needs security. Is there a blockchain here who don't have? Just curious though
That is correct. The benefits of blockchain is that each one is allowed to take part and include in. On the off chance that there is a framework security for blackchain clients implies that it restrains and out of the base and establishment of blockchain. The security is on the clients itself, while each client keep their record spare and doesn't give any essential data of the records, it will be extremely sheltered.
On blockchain each full node is not dependend from a centralized service.
This depends on most networks which utilize a blockchain, but not on all.
There are a lot of projects with either a 'permissioned' blockchain, which does only allow participants based on some properties, decided by a central authority.
Or projects which 'seem' to be decentralized, but in fact are extremely centralized (e.g. NEO).
While a blockchain only is useful and necessary in a decentralized and trustless network, a lot of projects are just using it as a buzz word to attract more user / investors.
It is not the 'blockchain' but the network topology which makes a network/system decentralized.
is blokchain needed for security?
yes of course, because the Blockchain System does not use a third party as a center, but uses many parties or computers that are spread on the network itself. This will make irresponsible people difficult to enter the system and have interference that is not possible.
yes of course, because the Blockchain System does not use a third party as a center, but uses many parties or computers that are spread on the network itself. This will make irresponsible people difficult to enter the system and have interference that is not possible.
This is the typical canned response. But what secures the blockchain? What makes it hard for "bad actors" from colluding? The answer lies in how Bitcoin works and why it works, and once you deeply understand it, you will start saying "Bitcoin, not blockchain".
On blockchain each full node is not dependend from a centralized service. The technologies of the blockchain are not new. We had cryptography already and p2p networks. The combination of all those technologies makes blockchain so successful, unique and secure. We will soon see, that Blockchain will take an important part in our personal and business life.
Block chain is a powerful and secure network. In terms of security blockchain provides the solution to identity authentication which was the answer to reduce fraud, crime, fake document, breached accounts and making sign on going through seamless which is why some banking sector are captivated by it. However, it can be use during election for counting genuine vote either. There fore a secure database is incomplete without block chain.
Yes block chain is immutable and make a distributed secure database without block chain is like been no sunshine and rain because a lot of internet users used a node of the network records and corroborate each transaction data. So, the best distributed secure database is by making use of block chain.
is blokchain needed for security?
yes of course, because the Blockchain System does not use a third party as a center, but uses many parties or computers that are spread on the network itself. This will make irresponsible people difficult to enter the system and have interference that is not possible.
yes of course, because the Blockchain System does not use a third party as a center, but uses many parties or computers that are spread on the network itself. This will make irresponsible people difficult to enter the system and have interference that is not possible.
But then that will bring us back to my previous post where I was asking "what is a blockchain?". Does the unquestionability of bringing consensus, or the "truth", to a "blockchain" have to be secured by proof of work? Because for me it has to.
Creating a "blockchain" for the sake of having it called a "blockchain" is moronic.
We may be moronic to call blockchain "blockchain" but the fact that even if is wasn't called POW/mining/TheMatrix or something, the information about Proof of Work wasn't been disregarded.That's how Terminology works and I hate it (Honestly, I'm bad at remembering names).
Okay, let's just stop there.
That's your opinion and you expressed your point, I'm not against it.
We're getting off topic.
If Proof of Work was not disregarded, then would you agree with me when I say that "those claiming to use a blockchain without Proof of Work is not a real blockchain?"
Plus this is not off-topic. It is Proof of Work that secures the Bitcoin "blockchain".
But then that will bring us back to my previous post where I was asking "what is a blockchain?". Does the unquestionability of bringing consensus, or the "truth", to a "blockchain" have to be secured by proof of work? Because for me it has to.
Creating a "blockchain" for the sake of having it called a "blockchain" is moronic.
We may be moronic to call blockchain "blockchain" but the fact that even if is wasn't called POW/mining/TheMatrix or something, the information about Proof of Work wasn't been disregarded.That's how Terminology works and I hate it (Honestly, I'm bad at remembering names).
Okay, let's just stop there.
That's your opinion and you expressed your point, I'm not against it.
We're getting off topic.
Creating a "blockchain" for the sake of having it called a "blockchain" is moronic.
Yes Proof of Work is the major security feature and must be the basis of the technology's name but in terms of digital currency, the process of "creating blockchain" and the nodes where the "blockchain" was being stored are working together to provide the "advertised" security.POW creates blockchain, nodes are hodling/verifying blockchain; blockchain is still a logical choice of term. (one more time: blockchain)
That's just terminology, it still depends on how people define "blockchain".
In applications other than crypto, IMO, they can call it whatever they want.
If there is no agreed upon definition then "blockchain" is nothing more than a term used to join the bandwagon. Anything can be a blockchain according to your belief, which is also moronic.
Haha, that clearly not what i mean.That's why I hate Terms, a person may know what the "thing" is, but he may be unaware of what it is called.
I mean IMO, the blockchain technology can be called other than "blockchain" if it isn't applied to digital currencies.
That's the problem though, the label "blockchain" is slapped on pretty much anything that even remotely fits the bill with total disregard of existing expectations in terms of security and permissionlessness.
Obviously language is always flowing, as is terminology, but if you dilute the meaning of a term too much it ceases to transport information.
Worse still, if a term has a (more or less) concrete definition in one context (eg. "a blockchain is a permissionless, distributed ledger secured by a decentralized consensus algorithm") but no concrete meaning in another context (eg. "blockchain is the magical solution to everything that is wrong in the world") using it as a fraudulent label becomes trivial.
Sure, the misappropriation of technical terms towards meaningless marketing-speak is nothing new, but at least to me it seems like "blockchain" is one of the worst offenders yet.
If there is no agreed upon definition then "blockchain" is nothing more than a term used to join the bandwagon. Anything can be a blockchain according to your belief, which is also moronic.
Haha, that clearly not what i mean.That's why I hate Terms, a person may know what the "thing" is, but he may be unaware of what it is called.
I mean IMO, the blockchain technology can be called other than "blockchain" if it isn't applied to digital currencies.
But then that will bring us back to my previous post where I was asking "what is a blockchain?". Does the unquestionability of bringing consensus, or the "truth", to a "blockchain" have to be secured by proof of work? Because for me it has to.
Plus you talk about some applications that use "blockchain" that are not cryptocurrencies. Do you believe that they are using a "blockchain"? How would you define that "kind of blockchain" then?
If there is no agreed upon definition then "blockchain" is nothing more than a term used to join the bandwagon. Anything can be a blockchain according to your belief, which is also moronic.
Haha, that clearly not what i mean.That's why I hate Terms, a person may know what the "thing" is, but he may be unaware of what it is called.
I mean IMO, the blockchain technology can be called other than "blockchain" if it isn't applied to digital currencies.
Creating a "blockchain" for the sake of having it called a "blockchain" is moronic.
That's just terminology, it still depends on how people define "blockchain".In applications other than crypto, IMO, they can call it whatever they want.
Then what is a blockchain? Is Google drive a blockchain? Is Amazon AWS a blockchain? Twitter, Facebook, Instagram?
If there is no agreed upon definition then "blockchain" is nothing more than a term used to join the bandwagon. Anything can be a blockchain according to your belief, which is also moronic.
Of course it's needed, instead of storing information in one place, you store them across the entire network of computers. You can also verify whether signatures have changed or not. Users already mentioned much.
To sum up, blockchain adds an extra layer of protection to everything, that's the reason why even goverments are going to implement it. Currently it's possible to register land titles by using blockchain.
To sum up, blockchain adds an extra layer of protection to everything, that's the reason why even goverments are going to implement it. Currently it's possible to register land titles by using blockchain.
I get that blockchains enable immutable data to be recorded, so that I suppose hackers can't delete or write over data on the block.
But what are the other benefits of blockchain for security? I mean, you could make a distributed secure database that doesn't need blockchain right?
But what are the other benefits of blockchain for security? I mean, you could make a distributed secure database that doesn't need blockchain right?
If hackers can get into your system and have permissions to modify your data, the system has already failed. Even if hackers can't rewrite blocks, they can steal, delete or encrypt your data. Besides, many of those private blockchains are aiming to be editable, so hackers might even be able to modify such blockchains. I know very little about software engineering, but I don't think that blockchain is a revolution in data integrity, services have managed to keep their databases intact without blockchain for decades.
Blockchain is a data structure that enables the creation of a digital ledger of transactions and shares it within a distributed network of computers. It utilizes cryptography to allow each participant on the network to use the ledger in a secure way without a central authority.
Once a block of data is recorded and placed on the Blockchain ledger, it’s extremely hard to change or remove. Blockchain can be hacked in theory (it would take decades and a supercomputer), but in reality, it’s impossible.
So, in my opinion the blockchain is needed for security.
Once a block of data is recorded and placed on the Blockchain ledger, it’s extremely hard to change or remove. Blockchain can be hacked in theory (it would take decades and a supercomputer), but in reality, it’s impossible.
So, in my opinion the blockchain is needed for security.
Creating a "blockchain" for the sake of having it called a "blockchain" is moronic.
Yes Proof of Work is the major security feature and must be the basis of the technology's name but in terms of digital currency, the process of "creating blockchain" and the nodes where the "blockchain" was being stored are working together to provide the "advertised" security.POW creates blockchain, nodes are hodling/verifying blockchain; blockchain is still a logical choice of term. (one more time: blockchain)
That's just terminology, it still depends on how people define "blockchain".
In applications other than crypto, IMO, they can call it whatever they want.
I mean, you could make a distributed secure database that doesn't need blockchain right?
There's only one way I can answer this: It's an option, not really necessary to all things that require security.
I believe that some of you missed the fact that what makes a blockchain secure and special like the Bitcoin blockchain is proof of work. Creating a "blockchain" for the sake of having it called a "blockchain" is moronic.
Jump to: