268 lines
12 KiB
Markdown
268 lines
12 KiB
Markdown
|
# Privacy scoring modelling > Web3privacy now analytical [platform](https://github.com/Msiusko/web3privacy/tree/main/Web3privacynowplatform)
|
|||
|
|
|
|||
|
|
**Approach**
|
|||
|
|
|
|||
|
|
| Phase | Description |
|
|||
|
|
| ------------- | ------------- |
|
|||
|
|
| 1. **Expert take** | Outreach privacy experts behind core privacy services - aggregate their professional opinions on how to analyze if a service is truly private or not.) |
|
|||
|
|
| 2. **Scoring model prototyping** | Create an open & flexible scoring model for a communal feedback loop - share with the privacy community, evaluate. |
|
|||
|
|
| 3. **Scoring model MVP release** | Deliver balanced model for privacy services assessment - powered by pros & general public opinions. |
|
|||
|
|
|
|||
|
|
# Current status (02/04/2023)
|
|||
|
|
|
|||
|
|
|
|||
|
|
|
|||
|
|
## 0. 350+ privacy solutions in 1 database - [delivered](https://github.com/Msiusko/web3privacy/blob/main/README.md)
|
|||
|
|
## 1. On-going community research (survey) within the privacy experts.
|
|||
|
|
I asked experts behind privacy-services or contributors to the privacy-centric communities to share their visions on analysing whether a service is private. Answers were collected via chats & survey [form](https://forms.gle/ETBEZed9LUUtLWT87)
|
|||
|
|
|
|||
|
|
**Criteria**:
|
|||
|
|
- min 50 different experts
|
|||
|
|
- a broad range of positions: tech, ops, marketing, devrel, strategy
|
|||
|
|
- a broad range of services: from privacy coins to mixnets
|
|||
|
|
- different geographies: from the USA to Russia
|
|||
|
|
|
|||
|
|
# Questions from the privacy experts
|
|||
|
|
|
|||
|
|
# Take 1
|
|||
|
|
- does it has traceability? (ie addresses is hidden from the public ledger)
|
|||
|
|
- does it has unlinkability? (ie transactions can't be linked to each other)
|
|||
|
|
- does the amount of transfer is hidden?
|
|||
|
|
- does IP addresses of participants hidden?
|
|||
|
|
- is it decentralized and based on open-source technology?
|
|||
|
|
|
|||
|
|
# Take 2
|
|||
|
|
|
|||
|
|
| Question | Observation |
|
|||
|
|
| ------------- | ------------- |
|
|||
|
|
| much the users in control of their data disclosure? | (Scale 1-10) |
|
|||
|
|
| how well community feedback and evaluation is built into product dev? | the less -» the more centralized it is -» the smaller the % of it staying private without collective intelligence. This is like the web3privacynow - platform part, actually, for sales, but also I found this really relevant. |
|
|||
|
|
| is there a community bug/security bounty program/platform? | yes, no |
|
|||
|
|
| how much transparent disclosure is available on the tech and company | like smart contract audits, security audits, source of financing? |
|
|||
|
|
| how private the tech stack it uses on all layers. from hardware to l3/l4 etc. | how well it is disclosed what they built on and where they host stuff, or if the tech is decentralized like nym - is there available dashboard data about this? |
|
|||
|
|
| product roadmap and release flexibility - this is a harder one, and I'm not sure it makes sense. What I mean is it's also important to have a clear vision while reacting to current needs/bugs /fixing vulnerabilities. | maybe its redundant with no2 and no2b |
|
|||
|
|
|
|||
|
|
# Take 3
|
|||
|
|
1. What are the trust assumptions the user has by using the platform?
|
|||
|
|
2. What and how is user information stored and transmitted?
|
|||
|
|
3. How much PII is stored/collected?
|
|||
|
|
4. How is information collected + processed + disseminated
|
|||
|
|
5. How completely can you participate with total privacy?
|
|||
|
|
|
|||
|
|
# Take 4
|
|||
|
|
|
|||
|
|
| Direction | Observation |
|
|||
|
|
| ------------- | ------------- |
|
|||
|
|
| network privacy | how do you connect to the chain? Can you do it via Tor? |
|
|||
|
|
| blockchain privacy | do the resulting on-chain transactions offer the user any on-chain obfuscation? |
|
|||
|
|
| censorship resistance | how resistant is the project to external pressure? Will the project censor you? |
|
|||
|
|
| permission | do I need to create an account to access the thing, or is the thing open access? |
|
|||
|
|
| custody of funds | is the user out of control of their keys at any point? |
|
|||
|
|
|
|||
|
|
# Answers from the privacy experts
|
|||
|
|
**Additional lenses**: _is it accessible to a non-web3 person & is it accessible to a non-tech web3 person?_
|
|||
|
|
|
|||
|
|
## Contents
|
|||
|
|
- [General](#General)
|
|||
|
|
- [Docs](#Docs)
|
|||
|
|
- [Third-party analysis](#Third-party-analysis)
|
|||
|
|
- [VCs](#VCs)
|
|||
|
|
- [Team](#Team)
|
|||
|
|
- [Privacy policy](#Privacy-policy)
|
|||
|
|
- [Token](#Token)
|
|||
|
|
- [Infrastructure](#Infrastructure)
|
|||
|
|
- [Storage](#Storage)
|
|||
|
|
- [Data aggregation](#Data-aggregation)
|
|||
|
|
- [Traction](#Traction)
|
|||
|
|
- [Governance](#Governance)
|
|||
|
|
- [Privacy execution](#Privacy-execution)
|
|||
|
|
- [Product-centric](#Product-centric)
|
|||
|
|
- [Testing](#Testing)
|
|||
|
|
- [Other](#Other)
|
|||
|
|
|
|||
|
|
# General
|
|||
|
|
| Scoring | Non-web3 person assesment | Non-tech assesment |
|
|||
|
|
| ------------- | ------------- | ------------- |
|
|||
|
|
| Immutability | - | - |
|
|||
|
|
| Decentralised throughout, including hosting | - | - |
|
|||
|
|
| Permissionless & accessible to all | - | - |
|
|||
|
|
| Open-source | + | + |
|
|||
|
|
|
|||
|
|
# Docs
|
|||
|
|
| Scoring | Non-web3 person assesment | Non-tech assesment |
|
|||
|
|
| ------------- | ------------- | ------------- |
|
|||
|
|
| read the documentation | - | - |
|
|||
|
|
| Good and comprehensive documentation | - | - |
|
|||
|
|
|
|||
|
|
# Third-party analysis
|
|||
|
|
| Scoring | Non-web3 person assesment | Non-tech assesment |
|
|||
|
|
| ------------- | ------------- | ------------- |
|
|||
|
|
| ask about its weaknesses from competitors | + | + |
|
|||
|
|
| Number of peer-reviewed articles at conferences and journals of team members | + | + |
|
|||
|
|
| Where's the code? Has it been audited? | + | + |
|
|||
|
|
| Validation by trusted and respected independent scientists and researchers | + | + |
|
|||
|
|
|
|||
|
|
# VCs
|
|||
|
|
| Scoring | Non-web3 person assesment | Non-tech assesment |
|
|||
|
|
| ------------- | ------------- | ------------- |
|
|||
|
|
| Who are the VCs | - | - |
|
|||
|
|
| Not funded by big US VCs like a16z | - | + |
|
|||
|
|
|
|||
|
|
# Team
|
|||
|
|
| Scoring | Non-web3 person assesment | Non-tech assesment |
|
|||
|
|
| ------------- | ------------- | ------------- |
|
|||
|
|
| ideological team | - | + |
|
|||
|
|
| Reputation of the team | - | + |
|
|||
|
|
| is it purely marketing oriented, or it seems created by researchers/developers, are the developers anons? | + | + |
|
|||
|
|
|
|||
|
|
# Privacy policy
|
|||
|
|
| Scoring | Non-web3 person assesment | Non-tech assesment |
|
|||
|
|
| ------------- | ------------- | ------------- |
|
|||
|
|
| Privacy Policy content | + | + |
|
|||
|
|
| Non-vague and non-intrusive privacy policy | + | + |
|
|||
|
|
| #privacy protection policies | + | + |
|
|||
|
|
|
|||
|
|
# Token
|
|||
|
|
| Scoring | Non-web3 person assesment | Web3, but non-tech assesment |
|
|||
|
|
| ------------- | ------------- | ------------- |
|
|||
|
|
| is there a token since the beginning? | - | + |
|
|||
|
|
| if the token since beginning - weird | - | + |
|
|||
|
|
|
|||
|
|
# Infrastructure
|
|||
|
|
| Scoring | Non-web3 person assesment | Non-tech assesment |
|
|||
|
|
| ------------- | ------------- | ------------- |
|
|||
|
|
| How much to run a node | - | + |
|
|||
|
|
| Where are the nodes | - | + |
|
|||
|
|
| Number of nodes/servers/ -> the larger the footprint the best privacy | - | + |
|
|||
|
|
|
|||
|
|
# Storage
|
|||
|
|
| Scoring | Non-web3 person assesment | Web3, but non-tech assesment |
|
|||
|
|
| ------------- | ------------- | ------------- |
|
|||
|
|
| e2e encrypted LOCAL storage | - | + |
|
|||
|
|
| What user information is stored? (username, IP address, last connection, wallets associate, etc) | - | + |
|
|||
|
|
| Where is it stored? (centralized server, certain jurisdictions, on-chain, in browser/local cache) | - | + |
|
|||
|
|
|
|||
|
|
# Data aggregation
|
|||
|
|
| Scoring | Non-web3 person assesment | Non-tech assesment |
|
|||
|
|
| ------------- | ------------- | ------------- |
|
|||
|
|
| no email or tel nr for signup | + | + |
|
|||
|
|
| control over personal data | - | - |
|
|||
|
|
| does not implement KYC or AML | + | + |
|
|||
|
|
| Metadata privacy / Minimal to no metadata capture | - | - |
|
|||
|
|
|
|||
|
|
# Traction
|
|||
|
|
| Scoring | Non-web3 person assesment | Non-tech assesment |
|
|||
|
|
| ------------- | ------------- | ------------- |
|
|||
|
|
| Amount of transactions | + | + |
|
|||
|
|
| number of people using it | + | + |
|
|||
|
|
| is it famous | + | + |
|
|||
|
|
| Latency | - | - |
|
|||
|
|
| Time of test and battle-tested code - (e.g. how BSC had passed the stress time of withdrawals with FTX drama or crypto schemes such as ECDSA with more than 2-3 decades alive) | - | - |
|
|||
|
|
| Cost | - | + |
|
|||
|
|
|
|||
|
|
# Governance
|
|||
|
|
| Scoring | Non-web3 person assesment | Non-tech assesment |
|
|||
|
|
| ------------- | ------------- | ------------- |
|
|||
|
|
| DAO structure (if applied) | - | + |
|
|||
|
|
|
|||
|
|
# Privacy execution
|
|||
|
|
| Scoring | Non-web3 person assesment | Non-tech assesment |
|
|||
|
|
| ------------- | ------------- | ------------- |
|
|||
|
|
| How is it being transmitted? (encrypted, unencrypted, offuscated, etc) | - | - |
|
|||
|
|
| Combined those encryption methods effectively (holistic solution) | - | - |
|
|||
|
|
| Confidentiality of transactions | - | - |
|
|||
|
|
| the ability to hide transactional data from the public | - | - |
|
|||
|
|
| strong encryption algorithms | - | - |
|
|||
|
|
| If the speed in connection is too fast, there most probably no privacy there and rather a direct channel between user - app | - | - |
|
|||
|
|
| p2p / no central server | - | - |
|
|||
|
|
| Trustless - No ID required (this is where ZKs are useful) | - | + |
|
|||
|
|
| Usage of ZK | - | - |
|
|||
|
|
|
|||
|
|
# Product-centric
|
|||
|
|
| Scoring | Non-web3 person assesment | Non-tech assesment |
|
|||
|
|
| ------------- | ------------- | ------------- |
|
|||
|
|
| Onboarding steps | + | + |
|
|||
|
|
| Usability - for end users or in the developer experience if it is a B2B project. | + | - |
|
|||
|
|
|
|||
|
|
# Testing
|
|||
|
|
| Scoring | Non-web3 person assesment | Non-tech assesment |
|
|||
|
|
| ------------- | ------------- | ------------- |
|
|||
|
|
| Ability to run part of the service and verify for myself | - | - |
|
|||
|
|
| try to trace a transaction | - | - |
|
|||
|
|
| There is a way to verify the code I think is running, really is running e.g. attestation service | - | - |
|
|||
|
|
| Other tooling to verify e.g. block explorers | - | + |
|
|||
|
|
|
|||
|
|
# Other
|
|||
|
|
| Scoring | Non-web3 person assesment | Non-tech assesment |
|
|||
|
|
| ------------- | ------------- | ------------- |
|
|||
|
|
| Entropy (non-trivial to estimate, different measurements for type of service). Some examples: https://arxiv.org/abs/2211.04259 or https://blog.nymtech.net/an-empirical-study-of-privacy-scalability-and-latency-of-nym-mixnet-ff05320fb62d | - | - |
|
|||
|
|
| Censorship-resistant (how hard it's for a powerful party to block/censor a given service) | - | - |
|
|||
|
|
| Precise description of the concrete privacy properties. Privacy is complicated, so if they don't say exactly what they protect, then its likely vapour | - | - |
|
|||
|
|
| Doesn’t sell your data | - | - |
|
|||
|
|
| protects against a global passive adversary | - | - |
|
|||
|
|
| strong secure anonymity tech | - | - |
|
|||
|
|
| Credibly neutral | + | + |
|
|||
|
|
| ISO/IEC 29190:2015: https://www.iso.org/standard/45269.html | - | - |
|
|||
|
|
| Anonymity Assessment – A Universal Tool for Measuring Anonymity of Data Sets Under the GDPR with a Special Focus on Smart Robotics: https://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=3971139 | - | - |
|
|||
|
|
|
|||
|
|
_Huge thanks everyone who contributed! I make it anon now, but will thank everyone (who would liked to be credited) once a scoring model will be published on GitHub for community evaluation._
|
|||
|
|
|
|||
|
|
# 2. My personal notes on privacy scoring (they were made before communal survey)
|
|||
|
|
_Sketches what could be put inside privacy-solutions scoring model_ (note: think of these as questions to experts for a workshop on scoring ideation).
|
|||
|
|
|
|||
|
|
**Key observations**
|
|||
|
|
|
|||
|
|
| Topic | Observation |
|
|||
|
|
| ------------- | ------------- |
|
|||
|
|
| Broad range of different takes on privacy assesment | Privacy experts have around 50+ tips |
|
|||
|
|
| Tech-centricity of assesment | Majority of the expert takes are hard to execute by non-tech people (they need info-help!) |
|
|||
|
|
| Privacy assessment takes enormous time | Time-To privacy-fit - potential for analytical service |
|
|||
|
|
| Privacy literacy isn't enough | The scoring model demand both "decentralisation", "open-source" & "privacy" topics understanding |
|
|||
|
|
| Mix of objective & subjective takes | Scoring criteria are different from objective (example: transaction traceability) & subjective (example: backed by a16z crypto) takes |
|
|||
|
|
|
|||
|
|
**Open-source transparency**
|
|||
|
|
- **GitHub repos**: # of commits, # stars, date of repo creation.
|
|||
|
|
|
|||
|
|
**Third-party validation**
|
|||
|
|
- **Security audits**: yes, no; type of audit; ammount of audits.
|
|||
|
|
|
|||
|
|
**Community validation**
|
|||
|
|
- Existing bugs
|
|||
|
|
- White hackers assessment (like Secret Network TEE bug)
|
|||
|
|
- Negative Discord, Twitter, other public feedback (product & founder-centric)
|
|||
|
|
|
|||
|
|
**Team**
|
|||
|
|
- Market validation
|
|||
|
|
- GitHub contribution
|
|||
|
|
- Track record (incl. red flag projects)
|
|||
|
|
|
|||
|
|
**Financials**
|
|||
|
|
- Investments
|
|||
|
|
- TVL (like Aztec's L2)
|
|||
|
|
- Donation-based
|
|||
|
|
- Public treasury
|
|||
|
|
|
|||
|
|
**Liveliness**
|
|||
|
|
- How active is GitHub activity
|
|||
|
|
- How active is the community
|
|||
|
|
- Is there public product traction?
|
|||
|
|
|
|||
|
|
**Product-readiness**
|
|||
|
|
- State of product-readiness
|
|||
|
|
- MVP-readiness
|
|||
|
|
- Protocol (test-net/main-net)
|
|||
|
|
- dApp (release timing, third-party validation like AppStore/Play Store)
|
|||
|
|
- network-reliability (the state of privacy in Ethereum, Solana, Avalanche etc)
|
|||
|
|
|
|||
|
|
**Cross-checked data leakage**
|
|||
|
|
- Complementing privacy stack data leakage (example: phone + dApp; wallet + RPC etc)
|
|||
|
|
- Third-party data leakage (from the hackers to state agents (think of Iran or North Korean govs))
|
|||
|
|
|
|||
|
|
**Data aggregation policies**
|
|||
|
|
|
|||
|
|
_Reference_: https://tosdr.org
|
|||
|
|
|
|||
|
|
**Centralisation level (incl KYC)**
|
|||
|
|
|
|||
|
|
Reference: https://kycnot.me/about#scores
|