Comment

Using a blockchain to maintain their internal ledgers means they have complete control over that blockchain, so they can manipulate it all they want. Blockchains aren’t magic.

source

Sort:hotnew top

UraniumBlazer@lemm.ee ⁨1⁩ ⁨year⁩ ago
Oh, didn’t see the “internal”. Yea, that’s stupid then.

source
Knock_Knock_Lemmy_In@lemmy.world ⁨1⁩ ⁨year⁩ ago
Who are “they” in the above message?

If you trust all your employees then an internal blockchain is useless, but do banks really totally trust their employees?

source
- hark@lemmy.world ⁨1⁩ ⁨year⁩ ago
  A blockchain won’t solve incorrect transaction information any more than an audit log in this case. This is an entirely internal process controlled by the bank and access would be restricted, so they couldn’t just edit audit logs. How do you think a blockchain would be used to improve this?
  
  source
  - Knock_Knock_Lemmy_In@lemmy.world ⁨1⁩ ⁨year⁩ ago
    The actions that an employee could perform would be limited by their private key’s abilities. Blockchain can be preventative. It’s not only for retrospective analysis.
    
    source
    hark@lemmy.world ⁨1⁩ ⁨year⁩ ago
    The actions that an employee could perform in any database would be limited by their account permissions. Blockchain doesn’t change this. I pointed out a retrospective mechanism because a completely internal blockchain wouldn’t prevent tampering either.
    
    source
    -> View More Comments