Security Validations to Blockchain Technology

Security Validations to Blockchain Technology
Image by mmi9

Cryptocurrency is the new benchmark for merchants who use blockchain technology as a wallet for encrypted currencies to keep Bitcoins and the like safe. Many traders around the world are still looking for the security of blockchain technology.

Cryptocurrency merchants are still very much scared to launch their fund through the blockchain technology, and this has lead to questions like, “how safe is blockchain technology.”


The essence of using blockchain technology is to enable people – especially people who do not trust anyone – to share valuable data in a more secure and inaccessible way.

Blockchain stores data using sophisticated mathematical rules and innovative software that is extremely difficult to manipulate for attackers. But the security of the best-designed blockchain systems may fail where mathematical and software rules come into contact with humans, skilled cheats, in the real world, where things can become messy.

To understand this, let’s start with what makes blockchains “safe” in principle using Bitcoin as an example.

In the Bitcoin Blockchain, shared data is the history of all Bitcoin transactions ever made: a large accounting ledger. The reason is stored in multiple copies on a computer network called “nodes”. Whenever someone sends a transaction to the ledger, the nodes check to see if the transaction is valid – people who have passed a bitcoin have a bitcoin to spend. A subset of them compete to legitimate group transactions into “blocks” and add them to a chain of previous transactions. The owners of these nodes are called miners. Minors who add new blocks to the chain earn bitcoins as a reward.

What makes this system theoretically inaccessible are two things: a unique cryptographic fingerprint of each block and a “consensus protocol”, the process by which network nodes agree on a shared history.

Fingerprinting, called a hash, initially requires a lot of computing time and energy. This is proof that the miner who added the block to Blockchain did the math work to earn a bitcoin reward (for that reason Bitcoin would use a “work proof” protocol).

It is also a type of seal because modifying the block would require generating a new hash. However, checking to see if the hash matches your block is safe, and as soon as the nodes do so, they update their copies of Blockchain with the new block. This is the consensus protocol.

The last security element is that hashes also serve as links in the Blockchain: each block includes the unique hash of the previous block. Therefore, if you want to edit a book-entry retroactively, you must calculate a new hash not only for the block in which it is located but also for each subsequent block.

And you must do it faster than other nodes can add new blocks to the chain. So unless your computers are more powerful than the rest of the combined nodes (and yet success is not guaranteed), added locks will conflict with existing ones. Other nodes will automatically reject your changes. This makes Blockchain inviolable or “unchanging”.


Blockchain technology is transforming business processes, allowing consumers to bypass middlemen in a number of important services. This reduces costs and increases efficiency. Thus, Blockchain has the potential to reduce poverty in developing countries.

The question is, “Is this blockchain technology safe?” Or, more accurately, “can blockchain technology provides confidence and privacy at the same time to ensure private and tamper-free records?”

These are issues that should concern government agencies, companies, startups, development agencies, etc. who are investigating blockchain technology for more efficient delivery of aid, remittances, smart contracts, healthcare and more. These questions mainly concern social entrepreneurs with the potential for cheaper international payments, clearer property rights and broader access to finance.

The Blockchain sees itself as a decentralized book that can effectively decentralize trust and reduce costs by eliminating intermediaries like banks. Blockchain technology adds entries to GL that is validated by the broader user community than by a central authority.

Each block in the Blockchain represents a transaction record, and the chain links them together. The distributed computer network recognizes the file and lists the transaction blocks one by one – hence the name Blockchain.

In particular, the Blockchain has nothing of value, just like the printed fiduciary currency or the database, and the controversial cryptocurrencies are just an application of the Blockchain.


Absolute immutability does not exist; Blockchain, like any other network, is technically susceptible to change. However, because the computers or nodes in a blockchain network are distributed, it is almost impossible to change Blockchain due to the processing power or mathematical puzzle required for these changes.

To change a chain within Blockchain, you would need to take control of 51% of the computers in the same distributed book and change all the transaction records in a short amount of time – in 10 minutes for Bitcoin.


While it is difficult in a traditional information system to achieve security and privacy at the same time, Blockchain can do so by allowing confidentiality through a “public key infrastructure” that protects against malicious attempts to change data and the size of a book maintain. The more extensive and distributed the network is, the more secure it will be.

Other blockchain concerns include limited scalability, inadequate data protection and the lack of harmonized industry standards.

For example, privacy-enhancing technologies such as encryption and identity management can be used to display blockchain transactions on network nodes. They produce metadata, and statistical evaluations can also reveal information from encrypted data, allowing pattern recognition.

Data protection is a particularly complex issue in the European Union (EU), where the GDPR, which comes into force in May, provides for stricter conditions for the consent and retention of data required by companies. Protection of personal data and privacy Citizen privacy for EU transactions. It also prohibits leaving the EU through personal data and gives citizens “full and final control over all their data”.

This is a problem for public blockchains that do not control who hosts a node, and private blockchains (also called permissible blockchains) because no data can be deleted here. The new regulation also recognizes the “right to forget” that is inconsistent with the “immutability of transactions” in Blockchain.


To circumvent privacy issues, a blockchain operator can store personal information and reference that information outside the chain with an information hash – a one-way transformation of data into unreadable information.

Storing data out of jail means that personal data must be stored by individuals themselves or in a more traditional database. Documents you know as a customer, such as a scanned driver’s license or passport, can be stored using traditional technologies such as a standalone database and out-of-chain application systems.

However, storing data outside the chain reduces transparency and immutability and increases the risk of loss or theft of personal information as it spreads across other networks.

An emerging solution is “self-sovereign identity,” a digital concept that allows a person to control better and control the personal information with which he shares it. As blockchains become components of companies, institutions, and systems, it is important to interpret applicable laws and designs to maximize synergies and reconcile regulation, innovation, competition, and privacy.

In particular, Blockchain’s privacy depends on users. If encrypted and keys kept secure, this is not a problem. Blockchains are, in many ways, safer than a centralized system.


Vitalik Buterin, a co-founder of Ethereum, another chain system, such as Bitcoin and Hyperledger, pointed out that there is really a “scalability trilemma” in which only two of the three properties (decentralization, security or scalability) can be reached.

In distributed accounting protocols, each node stores and processes all transactions and keeps a complete copy of the “status” of account balances, contracts, storage, and so on. Running a complete node allows users to enjoy privacy and security, but this is complicated because the number of transactions increases continuously, making scalability difficult.

If developers increase the size of a block to support more transactions, the amount of data to store increases as well. Thus, as each node reaches its maximum capacity, only a few large companies will have the resources to run them, which would jeopardize decentralization and scalability. Developers are looking for ways around the trilemma.

It should be noted that private block strings do not face these scalability issues and can handle many more transactions per second.


A “security guarantee” of a blockchain system is “decentralization”. If blockchain copies are kept on a large network of nodes, there is no weak point to attack, and it is difficult for anyone to create enough computing power to subvert the system.

But recent work by Sirer and his colleagues shows that neither Bitcoin nor Ethereum is as decentralized as you think. They found that the four main bitcoin extraction operations had more than 53% of the average extraction capacity of the system per week. In the same vein, 61% of Ethereum miners accounted for 61%.

Some say that alternative consensus protocols, perhaps those that do not rely on mining, could be safer. But this hypothesis has not been tested on a large scale, and the new protocols would probably have security problems.

Others see potential in blockchains requiring permission to join, unlike Bitcoin, where anyone who downloads the software can join the network. These systems are not related to the crypto-currency anti-hierarchy, but this approach is aimed at financial and other institutions seeking to exploit the benefits of a shared cryptographic database.

Private systems (Blockchain authorized), however, raise your doubts. Who has the power to grant permission? How will the system ensure that validators are what they claim to be?

An authorized system can make its owners more comfortable. However, this only gives them more control, which means that they can make changes if the other participants in the network agree or disagree – which true believers would consider violating Blockchain’s very idea.

So, in the end, “safe” is very difficult to define in the context of blockchains. Safe for what? Who’s safe? But, according to Narula, “it depends on your perspective.


So much for the theory. Implementation in practice is more laborious. Just because a system works like Bitcoin – like many cryptographic currencies – doesn’t mean it’s as secure. Even when developers use proven cryptographic tools, it is easy to assemble them in a way that is not accidentally secure, says Neha Narula, director of MIT’s Digital Currencies Initiative. Bitcoin has been around for a long time, so it is the most tested in the world.

People also found creative ways to cheat. Emin Gün Sirer and his colleagues at Cornell University have shown that it is possible to subvert a blockchain even if you have less than half the mining energy of other miners. The details are a bit technical, but most of the time, a “selfish miner” can gain an unfair advantage by fooling other nodes, wasting time with cryptographic puzzles already solved.

Another possibility is an “eclipse attack”. Nodes in the Blockchain must remain in constant communication to compare data. An attacker who can control a node’s interfaces and deceive it by accepting false data that seems to come from the rest of the network can deceive it by wasting resources or committing fake transactions.

Finally, as unchanging as the Blockchain protocol, it doesn’t exist “in a vacuum,” says Sirer. Recent cryptographic currency hackers are often defective in places where blockchain systems connect to the real world – for example, application clients and third-party applications.

Hackers can, for example, break hot wallets – applications connected to the Internet to store private cryptographic keys that anyone with cryptographic currency needs to spend. Portfolios belonging to online cryptocurrency exchanges have become prime targets. Many exchanges claim to keep most of their users’ money in legal portfolios of hardware, offline storage devices. But, as the theft of more than 500 million NMS on Coincheck’s Japan Stock Exchange shows, this is not always the case.

The most complex touchpoints between blockchains and the real world are probably “smart contracts”, which are computer programs stored in certain types of blockchains that can automate transactions.

In 2016, hackers exploited an unexpected quirk in a smart contract written on Ethereum Blockchain to steal 3.6 million ether, worth about $ 80 million at the time. New autonomous decentralized organization (DAO). blockchain-based investment funds.

Since the DAO code lived on Blockchain, the Ethereum community had to promote a controversial software update to recover the money, creating a new version of the story in which the payment was never stolen. Researchers are still developing methods to ensure smart contracts don’t work properly.

The cryptocurrency retailer can take full advantage of Blockchain technology by upgrading its secure distribution of cryptographic currencies.


Two large Australian banks have successfully used Blockchain for bank guarantees for leasing commercial properties to mall operators. Digital Assurance has created a single source of information with reduced fraud potential and greater efficiency.

Blockchain’s “irreversible” and encrypted blocks of data can also help combat cybercrime as hacker attempts to modify data are immediately reported. As Blockchain applications for cybersecurity emerge, businesses and governments get involved.

US defence contractor Lockheed Martin last year announced its integration of Blockchain with systems engineering, supply chain risk management and software development.

At the same time, several Indian states are exploring blockchain-based systems to improve information efficiency and cybersecurity. In 2017, Andhra Pradesh approached Swiss cybersecurity company WISeKey International to ensure the security of citizen information stored in databases with Blockchain.

Recently, Irish company AID: Tech became the first organization in the world to provide transparent international assistance to refugees using Blockchain.

In short, blockchain technology can be robust, secure, reliable and private. Finally, security is provided by robust architecture, secure design practices, and efficient workflow rules.

Do the potential benefits of Blockchain outweigh the risks? In short, yes, as long as it has been executed correctly.

Every system has vulnerabilities. In today’s technology-driven financial sector, control and regulatory structures must enable innovation, ensuring stability, consumer protection and competition.

This means that new digital products and services must be designed and developed with regulatory compliance, cybersecurity, and data privacy created from the ground up.


Please enter your comment!
Please enter your name here