NYM – Holistic Privacy; Why ZKP aren’t enough?!
Ever wondered why your Smartphone/laptop/desktop requires constant modification? One reason is that the new security patch provides more inclusive security compared to its predecessor(s). Similarly, in the decentralized ecosystem specifically in blockchain-related platforms and applications, you could say that the successor of ZKP (zero-knowledge proof) is NYM (for the time being). A more popular name VPN (a virtual private network) can be seen as one of the predecessor(s) of the NYM. A Zero-knowledge proof requires three conditions for completing the validation of the proof, while such a scenario wouldn’t arise in NYM. This piece gets into the nitty-gritty of why NYM has become somewhat essential and ZYK is moving out of the picture.
This research shows unique ways of preserving security and privacy by using open-source applications and Wi-Fi (wireless fidelity) as well. Figure 3.1 gives an abstract idea of backend functioning. Illustrations of Tor browser and Wi-Fi Analyzer are used for showcasing how privacy is maintained through a mix of public key infrastructure, digital certificates, hashing passwords, security tokens, and transport layer security also so. It seems straight-forward after looking at figure 3.1 that authentication is the first step. After that, a session token or certificate is generated. It’s only after certificate’s generation the session token is sent after receiving an acknowledgement(s) and its appropriate response, as well as data, is sent at the end. Tor browser is an open-source browser which utilizes onion routing and most Wi-Fi networks being used by applications utilizing Java language as the coding done is comparatively safer and not easy to hack. From the research, it can be said that mutual validation between the client and the server simultaneously safeguarding the user’s identity got established. Anonymity got achieved via utilization of Tor and time-tokens/certificates. One area which would be addressed in the future is modifying Wi-Fi network access productively. Another way of safeguarding your/user’s data is through “Firmware IdM” which is a collaboration of Idemix Anonymous Credential System and cryptography.
As security and privacy concerns are increasing rapidly with a large number of the population across the world using smart phones/smart-electronic devices for daily usage, machine to machine (M2M) architecture is becoming relevant with regards to safeguarding user’s private data. If you don’t have some understanding of the upcoming technologies backend functioning like IoT, then you may take into consideration that M2M is being seen as a necessity for IoT and upcoming technologies as well. It’s been seen as a necessity for effectiveness and productivity also. Figure 1 showcases that a unique identifier (UID) for an IoT based handle would encompass a mixture of MAC, Hash, IMEI, URI, URN, EPC, and DOI a well for global transparent accountability purposes. The architectural reference model (ARM) mentioned in this piece shows how the interaction between different layers takes place keeping security IoT framework at the backend. The proposed model’s functioning in showcased in figure 4. In a way, the figure represents the entire life cycle of a product/service (metaphorically speaking). One factor (among others) that makes this proposed model unique is that it provides authentication, authorization, attribute management, credential, and cryptographic key provisioning as well. The additional functionality(s) which it offers is because of merging IdM system with FIRMWARE Key rock IdM. Another add-on which this proposed prototype offers include attributes for administering smart contracts also which isn’t present in the SCIM (system for cross-domain identity management) model. In the end, this piece of research has shown that the proposed model offers a solution where several security credentials could be obtained via the privacy-preserving technique. The following research helps in solving the issue of private authentication amongst decentralized open-ended ecosystem via NYM Credentials.
At the moment, the issue in decentralized platforms could be said as a paradox of identity management. You/user want to disclose your personal information as minimal as it may possible (rightly so). But for avoiding a Sybil Attack (attacker subverts the prominence of the network service by building a large number of fictitious identities and utilizes them for gaining disproportionate influence), NYM token/credential is built within an NYM Framework. The infographic displayed below will guide you in understanding the relationship(s) between various players involved in the flow/inter-change of NYM Tokens.
If you observe, some can link the tokens while some can’t. The word “Linkable” refers to the fact that a third party within the system can link a user to their respective activities with other entities/third parties in the NYM grid. The overall process gets initiated when the user gets NYM tokens. After that validators/authenticators modify tokens into credentials. Then the user showcases their respective credentials to the service provider, after which validators/authenticators confirm the transfer of tokens to the service provider. To understand instantly, numbers mentioned above the lines could also assist in getting clarity about NYM framework momentarily. As the idea and the proposed model is currently in its initial stage, you may assume a lot of modifications occurring in it in the coming days. The next model which indicates similar leanings concerning NYM’s holistic privacy is telling how their prototype may resolve the issue of denial-of-service-attack, revoking multiple linkability windows, augmenting Verinym Acquisition Protocol with Tor network.
The following model could be seen as the other side of the same coin (metaphorically speaking). As mentioned here, the Nymble Framework utilizes two trusted third parties namely, the Psednym Manager (PM) and Nymble Manager (NM). A user is built when both PM and NM issue together with a set of un-linkable use only once authentication tokens (named as Nymble).
The infographic placed above represents the various ways in which different stakeholders in the network can interact with each other. SP can also be referred to as the service provider. Nymble Issuer, in short, is written as NI. Verinym issuer is written as VI and PE also can be viewed as Pseudonym Extractor. Arrows at the end of lines will help you in understanding what all different activities can be done.
All the unique proposed models mentioned above are different ways of mentioning that to get holistic privacy, NYM is better than ZYK. To know more about the latest changes in the blockchain area or if you want to resolve some doubts or want to know how imbibing it within your firm may be useful, visit PrimaFelicitas.
Looking for help here?