Many people see a certain leading privacy protocol supporting threshold encryption and data privacy protection and naturally assume it is an absolute safe vault, eager to store all confidential information there. To be honest, this idea is very dangerous and somewhat lazy.
The key issue is this: although nodes indeed cannot see your sharded stored data, the entire access control system entirely depends on the smart contract rules you write on the Sui chain. In other words, the security ball is in your court.
Does your contract code have vulnerabilities? Was the private key managing permissions improperly leaked? Then the "lock" on the chain is basically useless. Programmable privacy sounds very advanced, but frankly, the security ceiling of the protocol is determined by your code quality, not by the protocol design itself.
Therefore, if you want to put key data on chain, you must go through a complete audit process and explicitly hardcode access rules. For those who lack the ability to write secure contracts, recklessly using programmable privacy systems can be even riskier than traditional centralized storage. This point must be carefully considered.
This page may contain third-party content, which is provided for information purposes only (not representations/warranties) and should not be considered as an endorsement of its views by Gate, nor as financial or professional advice. See Disclaimer for details.
6 Likes
Reward
6
6
Repost
Share
Comment
0/400
FrontRunFighter
· 18h ago
ngl, this is where most devs get absolutely wrecked. they see "threshold encryption" and think it's some magic wand, but really you're just shifting the attack surface to your own poorly audited code. the protocol isn't your bodyguard—*you are*.
Reply0
DataOnlooker
· 01-08 23:51
Exactly right, so many people have been fooled by that set of rhetoric, actually treating the privacy policy as an invincible shield.
View OriginalReply0
RugDocDetective
· 01-08 23:49
Basically, if your own code doesn't work, don't blame the protocol.
View OriginalReply0
BearMarketBard
· 01-08 23:27
Basically, if the contract code is bad, don't blame the protocol.
View OriginalReply0
OneBlockAtATime
· 01-08 23:23
That's so true, this is a common problem among most people—seeing a new concept and wanting to go all in. I've seen a few project teams mess up private key management completely, then blame the protocol for not working.
View OriginalReply0
ProbablyNothing
· 01-08 23:23
Haha, really, so many people just chase the novelty, stacking data on top of terrible code. Serves them right to get screwed over.
Many people see a certain leading privacy protocol supporting threshold encryption and data privacy protection and naturally assume it is an absolute safe vault, eager to store all confidential information there. To be honest, this idea is very dangerous and somewhat lazy.
The key issue is this: although nodes indeed cannot see your sharded stored data, the entire access control system entirely depends on the smart contract rules you write on the Sui chain. In other words, the security ball is in your court.
Does your contract code have vulnerabilities? Was the private key managing permissions improperly leaked? Then the "lock" on the chain is basically useless. Programmable privacy sounds very advanced, but frankly, the security ceiling of the protocol is determined by your code quality, not by the protocol design itself.
Therefore, if you want to put key data on chain, you must go through a complete audit process and explicitly hardcode access rules. For those who lack the ability to write secure contracts, recklessly using programmable privacy systems can be even riskier than traditional centralized storage. This point must be carefully considered.