Do you want BuboFlash to help you learning these things? Or do you want to add or correct something? Click here to log in or create user.

Once involved parties are identified there are at least two strategies for editing the ledger. One is to extend the transaction chain with new transactions that simply correct the database to match the intended reality. For this to be possible the smart contract must have been written to allow arbitrary changes outside its normal business logic when a sufficient threshold of signatures is present. This strategy is simple and makes the most sense when the number of parties involved in a state is small and parties have no incentive to leave bad information in the ledger. For asset states that are the result of theft or fraud the only party involved in a state may resist attempts to patch things up in this way, as they may be able to benefit in the real world from the time lag between the ledger becoming inaccurate and it catching up with reality. In this case a more complex approach can be used in which the involved parties minus the uncooperative party agree to mark the relevant states as no longer consumed/spent. This is essentially a limited form of database rollback.
If you want to change selection, open document below and click on "Move attachment"


owner: ionutt93 - (no access) - corda-technical-whitepaper.pdf, p20


statusnot read reprioritisations
last reprioritisation on suggested re-reading day
started reading on finished reading on



Do you want to join discussion? Click here to log in or create user.