Comment by shortwavesurfer@monero.town on Hackers steal NFTs worth millions. In other news, NFTs worth millions.

The way I read the article, the “worth millions” is the sum of the ransom demand.

The funny part is that the exploit is in the “smart” contract, ya know the thing that the blockchain keeps secure by forbidding any updates or patches.

I do see potential use for them, but not in the way they are currently being used. I could see uses like door keys, tickets, memberships, etc being of practical value, but not stupid little pictures.

I thought of it as a good way for artists to earn a living by more tokenized artworks, but then it gets hijacked by this shit.

Tickets, yes, door keys, no.

Besides the obvious of your door lock needing to be connected to the internet, and that could be a problem, what else do you see as being an issue with using it for door keys?

How exactly would that work? Keep in mind that the blockchain is by necessity not secret.

Right, but all the lock is doing is checking whether you own the NFT or not. If your house was in NFT, people could see that you bought a house, but not where it was as long as it was generic like house #40000

all the lock is doing is checking whether you own the NFT or not.

So, you’d need a method to verify who “you” are. And once again we’ve come up with a way to use NFTs that actually works better without NFTs.

Fair enough. I will say that I am not well enough versed in the topic to discuss it in depth.

How would that work in reality, how would the lock know that the NFT in question is the actual legal ownership of the house?

The only way to guarantee that is to change the law that deeds of houses can only be an NFT.

Otherwise someone could sell a house on paper, but retain the NFT to have access to the house.

An NFT lock would also have the following problems, excluding the trust of ownership in the real world.

Power to the lock is required, if your backup battery is dead then you might be locked out during a power cut.

Internet access is required, during a powercut your router will probably die as well, so even if a battery backup is working, you’d still be locked out.

Your ISP could have service interruptions, no internet, no access to the latest blockchain updates, meaning that the lock can’t trust that you actually have ownership/access, that would be an insanely easy way to hack the lock.

I can’t really address the first part about selling the house on paper and not transferring the NFT.

I figure this thing would have cellular access as well as Wi-Fi. So if your Wi-Fi was to go down, then the cell network would be used instead. And those generally use different ISPs for fiber and often get restored first or dont go down at all since they are commercial contracts. In the event of a total internet cut, it is well known that a house does not change ownership very often, so the lock could be programmed to not accept any new keys for a period like a day. The lock would accept only the old key during that time like a cooldown period

The only way to guarantee that is to change the law that deeds of houses can only be an NFT.

Which means that sovereign states would have to agree to no longer be the authority of who owned property, instead they’d just have to hand over all that authority to some distributed database. What’s in it for them? What’s in it for the people?

If the authority on who owns a home is a blockchain, then what happens if someone shows up at the police station, bruised and bleeding, and claims that they were tortured until they agreed to sign over the deed to their house. In the real world, the police (or at least the courts) would have authority over that deal, and if their investigation proved that someone was in fact tortured, it would mean it’s not a legitimate sale, and the ownership reverts to the original person. But, if “blockchain”, the police and courts have no authority. What’s on the blockchain is law.

Another question is: why would you need it for a key?

Long-established public/private keys and signatures are used in this way all the time to control access to servers around the world. No blockchain needed. Blockchain is helpful when we all need to agree on a series of events.

Homes are a nice example of where you can have an isolated system which knows what it needs to about you (e.g. a public key) without sharing or cross-checking anything with the world.

The chain would be used to establish who owns the home.

That sounds more like a land registry system, than a key.

That isn’t required for a key. What if I want to let my family member access the house tomorrow while I’m out? Do I have to sell it to them?

The key/lock relationship is not connected to ownership. Ownership could be connected to the ability to issue new keys, but even then the ownership doesn’t need to be logged in a blockchain for that - it can simply be signed by a key held by the land registry.

If you want to make an argument for using blockchains for the land registry then… go ahead, but it’s another discussion with a whole different set of arguments.

Just like the NFTs in the article! Great idea
Lol

This is a most excellent place for technology news and articles.

Our Rules

Follow the lemmy.world rules.
Only tech related content.
Be excellent to each another!
Mod approved content bots can post up to 10 articles per day.
Threads asking for personal tech support may be deleted.
Politics threads may be removed.
No memes allowed as posts, OK to post as comments.
Only approved bots from the list below, to ask if your bot can be added please contact us.
Check for duplicates before posting, duplicates may be removed

Hackers steal NFTs worth millions. In other news, NFTs worth millions.(www.theblock.co)

Technology

!technology@lemmy.world

Our Rules

Approved Bots

Community stats

Community moderators