2020-06-17
Attendees
@Ram Jagadeesan
@Mic Bowman
@Hart Montgomery
@Clive Boulton
@Peter Somogyvari
Luri Vinogradov
Notes
Self-describing characteristics for blockchain interchain integration and APIs.
The main discussion:
Assumptions of trust from this Cactus diagram
https://github.com/hyperledger/cactus/blob/master/whitepaper/use-case-ethereum-to-quorum-asset-transfer.png
Business model plugin handle
See last weeks IWG. See recording with @Peter and @Vipin Bharathan https://lf-hyperledger.atlassian.net/wiki/display/IWG/2020-06-10
Personal feature branch where I've been dabbling with a plugin for Open ID Connect (still has to pass muster, but if you are interested)
Implicit assumptions
Identity
Government issue identity
KYC [Notable, State of Washington is currently dealing with so called 'Scattered Canary identity fraud discovered by security researchers https://www.agari.com/email-security-blog/covid-19-unemployment-fraud-cares-act/
Transfers
Trust Coinbase exchange
Real World Transfer
Scotch
Capture implicit outside of protocol
Code the smart contract based on half or transaction (trusting the scotch will arrive)
Requires external payment
R3
DoS
Identity agree to meta
Degrees of trust
All of nothing
$5.00 is low risk
$50 million is les absolute
Customise smart contract per transaction
Trust Cactus
Trust Cactus server hosting service
Host your own Cactus server
Cactus has ability to verify ledgers
Cactus has ability for plugins to verify each other
Cactus has ability to specify plugin used in smart contract? (Peter mention, usure about this comment).
---//---
Future discussion (proposed agenda for later date)
Jun 17, 2020 Notes are fairly compete, but may have lost notion of context in brevity - cb