IBM Unveils Blockchain As a Service Based On Open Source Hyperledger Fabric Technology (techcrunch.com) 42
IBM has unveiled its "Blockchain as a Service," which is based on the open source Hyperledger Fabric, version 1.0 from The Linux Foundation. "IBM Blockchain is a public cloud service that customers can use to build secure blockchain networks," TechCrunch reports, noting that it's "the first ready-for-primetime implementation built using that technology." From the report: Although the blockchain piece is based on the open source Hyperledger Fabric project of which IBM is a participating member, it has added a set of security services to make it more palatable for enterprise customers, while offering it as a cloud service helps simplify a complex set of technologies, making it more accessible than trying to do this alone in a private datacenter. The Hyperledger Fabric project was born around the end of 2015 to facilitate this, and includes other industry heavyweights such as State Street Bank, Accenture, Fujitsu, Intel and others as members. While the work these companies have done to safeguard blockchain networks, including setting up a network, inviting members and offering encrypted credentials, was done under the guise of building extra safe networks, IBM believes it can make them even safer by offering an additional set of security services inside the IBM cloud. While Jerry Cuomo, VP of blockchain technology at IBM, acknowledges that he can't guarantee that IBM's blockchain service is unbreachable, he says the company has taken some serious safeguards to protect it. This includes isolating the ledger from the general cloud computing environment, building a security container for the ledger to prevent unauthorized access, and offering tamper-responsive hardware, which can actually shut itself down if it detects someone trying to hack a ledger. What's more, IBM claims their blockchain product is built in a highly auditable way to track all of the activity that happens within a network, giving administrators an audit trail in the event something did go awry.
so IBM "fixed" the block chain (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Basicly. It is a valid use of blockchain technology if you don't mind having trusted entities.
Bitcoin unaffected. Ethereum on the other hand....
Re: (Score:3)
Blockchain is going to cure all the worlds ills! (Score:3)
Re: (Score:2)
We've reached peak buzzword for blockchain in the last 6 months. It'll balance our national debt, cure cancer, and make everyone happy according to all the con artists, errr, sales people pitching it as the be all end all.
So it's like... everything ever. Welcome to the Hype Cycle! [wikipedia.org]
Re:Like everything ever. (Score:1)
Could be big in Fintech (Score:2)
Re: Could be big in Fintech (Score:2)
I am not sure... seems centralizing/clustering the system into many parts is opposite the concept of a open network where all participates vote on the validity of all transactions. They might have a way to keep votes localized for segregated transactions and then have the results accepted as valid by the rest of the system but still seems like a vector to create inconsistencies and disputes.
At that point you might as well get rid of the complexity of segregation/sharding and go with a central trusted autho
Re: (Score:1)
Selective or Universal, Multiple Consensus (Score:4, Interesting)
Re: (Score:2)
By that I mean, Intel, coke, att etc each get only one vote's worth of trust each, same as Linus, stallman, BoA and any registered, trusted developers.
Because that's not what certain industries (or regulators) want, but they have many, many use cases where Blockchain fabrics are useful. The Linux Foundation's Hyperledger fabric (and open source code) certainly isn't opposed to "flat" consensus models -- you can do that! But telling the semiconductor industry, or the beverage industry, or some other group
Re: (Score:2)
One thing these customers want .. is to gain all the auditability of a blockchain (the chain itself is impervious to manipulation) without their competitors seeing what they do. If user "A" has a transaction pending with user "B", "A" does not want competitor "C" to know about it and try to swoop in somehow. They want their purchase to provide real market advantage with a level of surprise, instead of having all their competitors roll out the same functionality two months later. And thus, limit their trans
Re: (Score:2)
If you don't trust an identified host to execute your transaction how does blockchain magically make that better?
Tanktalus provided one example upthread, what you might call "trusted competition" (or "competitive trust"). More generally, "trust" in the real world has many complexities, many shades of gray, and they are are not static. You might trust Ben Carson (or at least a younger one) to perform complex neurosurgery on your infant, but you might not trust him to run HUD. (Ben Carson didn't trust Ben C
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:1)
IBM CEO Ginny Rometty gives speeches at Fintech conferences all the time. They are available on YouTube. One oft-repeated phrase:
"Blockchain will do for transactions what the internet did for information".
BitCoin had no buy-in from large multinationals or any governments, yet, it was successful. These new business-friendly blockchain implementations absolutely DO.
Re: (Score:2)
Bingo! (Score:2)
Still missing... (Score:2)
Still missing a way to cram the word "Organic, gluten-free, equal gender representation" into the title.
Digital Assets Property Record Office (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
In-game assets (Score:2)
There's a company called Everdreamsoft [everdreamsoft.com] (I have a friend working there) that has a working prototype for in-game assets.
Buy (on a market place) or receive (in one of the games) an asset (usally cards for a card game), then you can use that asset in any other of the games that you play. A blockchain is used to keep track of who has what assets are in possession of which player.
(No steam-like central authority).
I am sure IBM will do very well with this (Score:2)
mostly by selling it to people who have no idea what it is but trigger on a buzzword or two.
Doesn't this sorta defeat the purpose? (Score:2)