[MaxBorsch228]

Suppose a hacker group get their hands on a valuable exploit. They are like LAPSUS$ and are going to make the exploit public access, but also want to make some $. I wonder if the following scheme is theoretically possible:

1. Put the encrypted exploit file into some kind of Blockchain 2. Create a crypto wallet and announce a fundraising 3. As soon as the sum on the wallet reaches, say, $5M, the exploit is automatically and consensually decrypted by the Blockchain system and released to the public.

[gouggoug]

And what purpose does the blockchain serve in your example?

[sennight]

Exactly right, this is why a market for assassination is unlikely to ever really emerge as a result of blockchain tech. People seem to forget that the only reason it works is because of the structured aligning of potentially competing objectives. There really isn't a way to decentralize an escrow service... I mean, you could try to leverage all the participant's competing interests - but that is a massive presumption and it doesn't even address the question of how. Not through PoW, because turtles all the way down, and not through PoS, because lol Ripple.

[darawk]

Is there another system that allows you to implement an anonymous assurance contract without a trusted third party?

[MaxBorsch228]

It guarantees that the group will receive the money and the exploit will be released if the fundraising is successful.

[mschuster91]

> As soon as the sum on the wallet reaches, say, $5M, the exploit is automatically and consensually decrypted by the Blockchain system and released to the public.

For that, all nodes in the blockchain would need to be in possession of the decryption key - which would allow anyone to decrypt the secret as well.

[mdoms]

Stop trying to make Blockchain a thing.

[laboratorymice]

> consensually decrypted by the Blockchain system

how would this work in practice? if the contract is to guarantee decryption, wouldn't the key(s) also need to be on chain? how do you keep the secret?