Re: [Sat] Question about asset-identifiers

[Rafael Belchior <[e-mail]>]

Hello Thomas,

Is there a possibility that the asset on NW02 preserves its original ID 
(DAI01)? This would eliminate the issues you are describing. We could 
also create a history of the IDs the asset has on the proofs that are 
returned from the gateways (to ensure traceability).

Rafael

A 2024-03-21 15:19, Thomas Hardjono escreveu:

> Folks,
> 
> Earlier this week I received a question about SATP-core, specifically 
> about digital asset identifiers in the origin network (NW1) and in the 
> destination network (NW2).
> 
> The digital asset identifier (DAI) is described very briefly in Section 
> 5.2.3 of draft-core-03 as a UUID.
> 
> The question looks simple, but has some twists related to traceability 
> of asset transfers (i.e. regulated assets and taxation) and privacy:
> 
> -- Assume the digital-asset is recorded in NW1 (i.e. in the ledger or 
> database) as having an identifier DAI01.  After a successful transfer 
> to NW2, the asset is assigned a new identifier DAI02 in NW2.
> 
> -- Question: should NW1 be aware of the new identifier DAI02 in NW2?   
> (for example, the new identifier DAI02 is reported back from gateway G2 
> to gateway G1 within the ACK-Final-Receipt message (message 3.7 of 
> draft-core-03)).
> 
> -- The implication concerns privacy:  if the new identifier DAI02 is 
> also copied (recorded as plaintext data) in NW1, this may permit other 
> participants (other asset holders) in NW1 to know the new owner of the 
> asset in NW2.
> 
> My response was that only the hash-of-DAI02 should be recorded in NW1.
> 
> So, the ACK-Final-Receipt message sent from gateway G2 to G1 should 
> have the following parameters (where these will be recorded as data 
> onto NW1 by G1):
> 
> Identifier of G1 and G2 (who handled the transfer instance).
> 
> The network identifier NW2 (to where the asset was transferred).
> 
> The asset identifier DAI01 (which is already known in NW1).
> 
> The hash of the asset identifier DAI02 (as it is known in NW2).
> 
> Date/timestamp.
> 
> As a corollary, when gateway G2 mints and assigns the new asset in NW2 
> (i.e. assign asset to Bob in NW2 immediately following the 
> Commit-Final-Assertion message 3.5), gateway G2 should also record the 
> hash of identifier DAI01 to NW2:
> 
> Identifier of G1 and G2 (who handled the transfer instance).
> 
> The network identifier NW1 (where the asset originated from).
> 
> The asset identifier DAI02 (the new identifier in NW2).
> 
> The hash of the asset identifier DAI01 (as it was known in NW1)
> 
> Date/timestamp.
> 
> Any thoughts?
> 
> --thomas

-- 
-- Rafael Belchior

Ph.D. student in Computer Science and Engineering, Blockchain - Técnico 
Lisboa
https://rafaelapb.github.io/
https://www.linkedin.com/in/rafaelpbelchior/