Opinion from Dr. Andreas Freund, EEA Mainnet Curiosity Group Member

Blockchains have a seldom talked about drawback which is unbiased of the ups and downs of crypto markets, and which may hamper long term Blockchain adoption outdoors of direct-to-consumer and a few B2B use instances: Blockchain cryptographic algorithms should not NIST compliant which is a significant factor in reaching compliance with FISMA (Federal Data Safety Administration Act)! And NIST/FISMA compliance, or the equal thereof outdoors the US, is a giant factor when enterprises cope with governments or enterprises that often cope with enterprises coping with governments.

Why are Blockchains sometimes not NIST compliant? Properly, the principle cause is that Blockchains have been born out of the deep distrust of something government-operated and endorsed within the wake of the Nice Recession of 2008; together with government-endorsed cryptographic algorithms. In any occasion, the SHA-3 hashing algorithm extensively accepted immediately was not finalized till 2015 after Blockchains akin to Ethereum had already made their decisions on hashing algorithms. Due to this fact, most Blockchains akin to Ethereum are utilizing algorithms that aren’t solely not NIST-approved, however that NIST recommends not utilizing. Observe, there are NIST-compliant Blockchains akin to Simba-Chain or Material working on IBM’s LinuxONE. Nevertheless, they’re excessive price and tough to handle in manufacturing^[1] as enterprises realized after spending some tens of tens of millions of {dollars} on consulting and implementation charges. Compounding the associated fee drawback is that they typically don’t yield the anticipated enterprise outcomes as a result of the chosen use instances weren’t fitted to Blockchains to start with! The principle takeaway for the dialogue beneath is that any new Enterprise Blockchain strategy should deal with not solely NIST-compliance but in addition each price and administration complexity successfully to draw new enterprise sponsors.

Does that imply that every little thing is hopeless for Blockchain in an enterprise when NIST compliance, price and administration complexity are a priority?

Fortunately, the reply isn’t any, it’s not hopeless. Not trivial, however not hopeless.

To know what this implies, let’s recap what traits Blockchain-based purposes can have:

• Information Integrity: In case you solely want that, then don’t use a Blockchain. There are cheaper alternate options.
• Provable Timestamping: Way more fascinating and helpful for audit trails, e.g. throughout provide chains.
• No single-point-of-failure: In case you want 100% availability, at a low worth.
• Censorship resistance: Entry to knowledge that for instance must be audited by third events not essentially recognized on the time of information creation, or executing (principally) irreversible transactions unbiased of any third occasion.
• Double-Spend Safety: Solely related in case you are coping with digital property on a Blockchain. In different phrases, you might be actually into DeFi.
• Inheriting Blockchain Safety Ensures: That one may be very fascinating, if you happen to want software scalability, but excessive safety. We are going to get to that in a bit.

Observe that not one of the above talks about knowledge privateness, one of many priceless jewels of enterprise software necessities. However no worries, you’ll be able to obtain knowledge privateness with out plastering business-sensitive knowledge in all places out within the open. We are going to get to that in a bit too.

Earlier than we get forward of ourselves, let’s pause right here and focus on how these traits relate to NIST compliance. At first look, not a lot, however let’s undergo every attribute and focus on its implications in a bit extra element. First, although, it’s value mentioning that to acquire Authority-To-Function (ATO) permissions from a authorities, e.g. the US authorities^[2], it’s okay to make use of non-NIST compliant cryptographic algorithms, or algorithms that NIST has not fashioned an opinion about, so long as these algorithms should not elementary to the safety of the appliance and the privateness of its knowledge. For instance, it’s good to show {that a} contract was executed on a particular day and has not been altered since. Utilizing a Blockchain, one would kind a cryptographic fingerprint utilizing a (NIST-approved) cryptographic hash of the contract, after which anchor that hash on a (public) Blockchain which gives, as soon as included in a block, a provable timestamp via the mix of block quantity, block hash, and timestamp. If the Blockchain have been reorganized, for instance via a 51%-attack, it could nonetheless be attainable to take the transaction with the contract hash, and its block and embrace each in one other (public) Blockchain. Due to this fact, the safety of the unique (public) Blockchain shouldn’t be elementary to the use case.

With this in thoughts, let’s look once more at every attribute, with a give attention to its impression on NIST compliance of an software utilizing Blockchain expertise:

• Information Integrity: This one is simple since you’ll be able to at all times have a duplicate of the related knowledge you anchored e.g. by way of a cryptographic hash on the Blockchain with one other type of knowledge integrity safety akin to a tamper-evident W3C Verifiable Credential with a NIST-approved cryptographic signature algorithm.
• Provable Timestamping: A bit tougher however doable. If the utilized chain have been compromised, one might nonetheless seize the block with the related transaction containing e.g. a NIST compliant cryptographic hash of a doc, and its timestamp, and anchor the complete block with the transaction via one other NIST compliant cryptographic hash on one other Blockchain; no actual hurt completed.
• No single-point-of-failure: Okay, so this can be a bit tough since NIST has not fashioned suggestions on consensus algorithms. Meaning so long as the consensus mannequin has a stable educational basis, e.g. a mathematical proof of safety, it may be efficiently argued for, and we put it within the not-not-NIST compliant bucket.
• Censorship resistance: This appears like a straightforward one however as a result of it implies that knowledge might be readily seen to (nearly) all contributors, nice care should be taken to make use of the correct obfuscation strategies for knowledge placed on a Blockchain, to efficiently argue that knowledge privateness is maintained. In order that one is a bit tough however could be overcome. Cling on tight, coming proper up.
• Double-Spend Safety: Now this one is basically arduous as a result of it combines the earlier factors with deterministic transaction execution, transaction validation, and block formation which all rely intricately on the cryptographic algorithms used. With out going into particulars, if you happen to want double-spend safety as a key function in your Blockchain-based software, you might be out of luck as to NIST compliance … in case your digital asset was born on the Blockchain! We are going to come again to that time in a second too.
• Inheriting Blockchain Safety Ensures: This appears to be clear-cut. In case your safety depends critically on the safety of the underlying Blockchain, and that Blockchain depends for its safety on not-NIST compliant algorithms; finish of the story. Once more, not so quick. The query is safety ensures for what? Whether it is for digital property born on a Blockchain, then the reply is similar as for Double-Spend safety. However, if the digital property are created off of the Blockchain first, and solely then replicated onto the Blockchain, the safety of that digital asset is now not essentially tied to the underlying Blockchain, and we now have the identical argument as for provable time-stamping to wiggle ourselves out of the NIST conundrum!

The above impression evaluation can now function a guidelines towards a Blockchain software’s NIST compliance wants, given the particular use case necessities of that software.

Earlier than shifting on and giving an software blueprint for a not-not-NIST compliant Blockchain-based software, let’s speak about knowledge privateness. Given the above standards, and present knowledge privateness rules, placing even encrypted knowledge on a Blockchain qualifies as a dumb thought, even when utilizing NIST compliant encryption algorithms. So what’s the different?

Reply: Zero-Data Proofs (ZKPs)

ZKPs are about making statements with out revealing underlying delicate knowledge, e.g. ACME company’s account stability is over $100,000, or this low cost code was correctly utilized to this order.

There are lots of sorts of helpful ZKPs – Merkle Proofs, Pedersen Commitments, Bulletproofs, ZK-SNARKs, ZK-STARKs, and so forth. The hot button is to make use of both NIST compliant or not-not-NIST compliant cryptographic algorithms when utilizing ZKPs. In any other case, go for it! ZKPs are an amazing device for enterprises to fulfill their knowledge privateness necessities each inner and regulatory.

Now we’re at a spot to make a wise advice on methods to construct a (not-not) NIST compliant Blockchain-based enterprise software – a blueprint.

Because the determine reveals, we begin with a standard enterprise software program stack on the highest – first, the appliance layer, then the appliance abstraction layer after which the middleware layer – with all of the required compliance e.g. NIST compliance built-in. On the backside of the stack, we now have a public Blockchain as a result of that obviates the necessity for enterprises to construct advanced consortia, spend some huge cash, and permit them to maneuver far more quickly with the event of recent merchandise. Between the middleware and public Blockchain layer, is the “magic” processing layer centered on privateness and pace. For the reason that stack will use privacy-preserving ZKPs and never primarily make the most of digital property created on the general public Blockchain, earlier considerations in regards to the utilization of public Blockchains are immediately gone. Because the up and down arrows on the left of the determine point out, stack safety will increase as we go from the highest layer to the underside, the general public Blockchain. The precise reverse occurs with the opposite three key traits – privateness, pace and management; they enhance from the underside layer to the highest layer the place a single enterprise has full management of all knowledge, and may subsequently guarantee privateness whereas sustaining excessive pace / scalability even for essentially the most delicate knowledge. That doesn’t imply, nevertheless, that privateness, pace and management is low in the direction of the underside of the stack, it simply implies that it’s increased within the high layers of the stack than on the backside.

Now, what about that “magic” processing layer/community?

Here’s what that layer can do utilizing present expertise to fulfill enterprise necessities:

• Information Privateness
  • Zero-Data Proofs of transactions
  • Sturdy encryption (the place required)
  • Newest cryptography methods e.g. quantum-secure algorithms
• Safety
  • Inherits the safety ensures from the general public Blockchain when utilizing the correct ZKPs anchored on the Blockchain
  • Digital asset knowledge could be instantly accessible by way of ZKPs on the general public Blockchain for use if required
• Verifiability
  • Anybody can confirm proofs on the general public Blockchain
  • Proofs can recursively confirm all asset transactions and the complete asset transaction historical past
  • Nothing is finalized till proofs are verified on the general public Blockchain
• Pace
  • Parallelization of transactions
  • Rolling up transactions by batching them with (recursive) Proofs
  • Much less price per transaction

In abstract, the “magic” processing layer has

• the identical safety assurances as the general public Blockchain used,
• 100 – 1000x extra scalability,
• assured knowledge availability,
• privateness preserved always,
• a lot decrease transaction charges,
• verifiability of all proofs by anybody on the general public Blockchain
• permits for KYC and AML

This sounds too good to be true. Does such expertise exist already? The reply is sure, and firms akin to Starkware, Aztec, zkSync, and others are engaged on getting their ZK-Rollup “Layer 2” applied sciences absolutely enterprise-ready. The main focus for all these efforts is public Ethereum as a result of it gives the very best safety ensures (variety of miners/validators and total-value-locked (TVL)), mixed with the required cryptographic help constructed into its execution layer.

Naturally, this isn’t the one attainable strategy for a Blockchain-based software to acquire a authorities ATO. Nevertheless, it’s a pretty simple, and by now well-understood strategy.

So what’s the net-net right here?

Enterprises now have

• A framework to evaluate use case wants versus Blockchain traits, and the way these wants could be met by Blockchain-based enterprise purposes that may receive a authorities ATO.
• A blueprint to construct Blockchain-based enterprise purposes in a means that will enable them to acquire a authorities ATO whereas, as depicted within the determine above, additionally permitting for added advantages:
  • Larger Belief via public Blockchains, public verifiability and cryptography enforced privateness
  • Decrease Price via simpler auditability (verifying ZKPs is quick and low-cost) and fancy transaction batching (rollups) within the Layer 2 software
  • Quicker Processing via parallelization of compute, extra transactions via rollups, and a smaller Blockchain footprint since public Blockchains are speculated to be sluggish by design to be able to present extra safety
  • Extra Flexibility and Alternative via the power to have conventional property to underpin crypto property on the Blockchain, easier integration between Layer 2 and a public Blockchain, and straightforward extension of layer 2 property into for instance the present DeFi ecosystems

In closing, it is very important be aware that within the instance of the US authorities, acquiring an ATO for an info system is not only restricted to cryptographic artifacts and crypto-modules. These signify an necessary piece of the safety controls which are recognized throughout the danger administration course of mandatory to acquire an ATO, as listed and defined in expansive element in NIST SP 800-37 Rev 2 and NIST FIPS-199. The method additionally  consists of components akin to consumer authentication/authorization below completely different utilization situations, system and course of change controls, catastrophe restoration, and enterprise continuity.

Is ATO/NIST compliance for Blockchain purposes related to your online business?  The EEA ATO Working Group would really like your enter.  Please contact [email protected].

Observe us on Twitter, LinkedIn and Fb to remain updated on all issues EEA.