How Secure is Blockchain Technology?

[Frank_Mayer]

I have noticed the fact that anyone who dares challenge the security of Blockchain, especailly when it comes to cryptocurrency gets labeled a "tin foil hat" lunatic.  As professionals I strongly feel that we owe it to the world to push back on any claims by any technology that it has no serious down side risks.  What is wrong with throwing a little cold water on fantasy promises of the glory of some new technology?  In the case of crypto currencies, here are some illuminationg articles: This Investopedia article https://www.investopedia.com/articles/investing/032615/can-bitcoin-be-hacked.asp.  amd this article highlights the actual exploit of the technology that occurred, refer to this CNBC Tech article https://www.cnbc.com/2019/05/08/binance-bitcoin-hack-over-40-million-of-cryptocurrency-stolen.html 

The ICT Works articleBy Wayan Vota on February 27, 2019 gets down into the software assurance issues that really point out the holes in the hype about blockchain https://www.ictworks.org/blockchain-implementation-risks/#.XSguP5-YVn0

[dcontesti]

Totally agree with you on this one.  Blockchain is not the holy grail that some would have us believe.

In doing research for a paper recently, I came across many articles highlighting the shortcomings.

d

[AppDefects]

---

@Frank_Mayer wrote:

What is wrong with throwing a little cold water on fantasy promises of the glory of some new technology?  In the case of crypto currencies,

---

The problem is with the abuse of the technology. One site I track is deadcoins.com In today's world new coins are created faster then you say exit scam...

[AppDefects]

Add Japan's BITPoint to the list...they just "discovered" that 3.5 billion yen ($32.3 million) in various digital currencies had gone missing from its management...oh, really?

[rslade]

All hail the Holy Blockchain!

There is but one Problem, and Blockchain is its Answer!

---

@Frank_Mayer wrote:

I have noticed the fact that anyone who dares challenge the security of Blockchain, especailly when it comes to cryptocurrency gets labeled a "tin foil hat" lunatic.

---

Definitely.  The current "magic" term.  Before that it was "cloud," and before that it was "IPS," and before that it was "biometric," and before that it was "firewall" ...

---

As professionals I strongly feel that we owe it to the world to push back on any claims by any technology that it has no serious down side risks.

---

Like global warming?  I keep seeing stories/mentions of the fact that the basic operation of Bitcoin is now pulling down the energy requirements (and carbon footprint) of a medium-sized country.  (And that Bitcoin mining has the footprint of another medium-sized country ...)

As it is, people keep throwing "blockchain" as a solution at the most inappropriate problems ...

---

What is wrong with throwing a little cold water on fantasy promises of the glory of some new technology?

---

Nothing at all.  As you note, it's our duty.

As such, a few additional pointers on the problems of blockchain: the Blockchain Security topic had a number of points of worth.  I also tried to point out that blockchain isn't a single thing: it's an amalgam of different technologies, all with their own variations.  As such it's impossible to state that any given "blockchain" is private, or secure, or resilient, unless you know, in detail, the specifics of that particular implementation.

[CraginS]

---

@Frank_Mayer wrote:

I have noticed the fact that anyone who dares challenge the security of Blockchain, especailly when it comes to cryptocurrency gets labeled a "tin foil hat" lunatic.  As professionals I strongly feel that we owe it to the world to push back on any claims by any technology that it has no serious down side risks. ...

---

Frank,

Because, as Grandpa Rob @rslade pointed out, blockchain is not a single technology. your core question is not a valid question. That is like asking how secure is locked door? (Feel free to extend the analogy by pointing out the many aspects of what might be a "locked door.")

It all depends on the overall implementation, selected components, detailed implementation, etc.

We still have too many people who naively assume all blockchain is identical to its granddaddy introduction, BitCoin. Commercial blockchain implementations do not rely on crowd-sourced crypto calculations as BitCoin does. Even other new crypto currencies do not necessarily rely on crowd-sourced crypto. The security of any given blockchain implementation is complexly tied to how the crypto is performed, by whom, with what authorities, and how trustworthy they are.

For instance, given F@c3B00k's history, I would never trust FB Libra cryptocurrency to NOT be used by FB to track purchase and spy on users through that record. You can be sure all Libra crypto will be handled by FB servers and FB-controlled clients on FB users' systems.

[AppDefects]

Which cryptocurrency exit scam bought this McLaren?

[Chuxing]

The original post missed the point, these cited references had nothing to do with the security of blockchain per se, and the technical arguments in those articles are semi-backed to say the best. The referenced 'security breaches' had very little to do with the blockchain itself, rather the fraud applications and management to a large extend. It is like to say: python is not secure, therefore we should not rely on it to provide security.

As to the missing/stolen coins of various types, again had little to do with the security of the technology itself, and a number of them were scams to begin with.

I have not heard any reputable, mainstream professionals claiming blockchain is the holy grail for security, except in places like investopedia or cnbc written by reporters know little about the technology, other than to grab a headline or two.

I recommend to take some online tutorials to have a better understanding of the technology, before we make any claims one way or the other, e.g., some free course from Princeton: 

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fOMVZXLjKYo