Bank of England Announces Information at CBDC Technology Conference Capacity Building and Privacy

Recently, the Bank of England announced the announcement of its “Technical Forum” at a meeting of Digital Banking Companies (hereafter referred to as CBDC).raw tokensCBDC Modelscalabilitycompetition, andcounts asthe model isTrack personal protectionPlease express higher expectations.

Currently, research and development of CBDCs in the UK is ongoing.to researchstage. In April last year, the Central Bank and the Ministry of Finance jointly formed the CBDC Research Group and held a “Technical Forum” to collect research results from experts and thinkers with the participation of financial institutions, education and financial institutions. Industry, infrastructure and technological services, etc.

The task force quoted above announced the results of the survey in November last year and announced that they would discuss whether to establish a CBDC by 2022 and beyond to publish a research process evaluation report. Former UK Treasury Secretary John Glen said the earliest date for Britain's CBDC could be "a decade away".

CBDC platform model and capacity of three models are available

According to the minutes of the meeting, the current research and development of CBDCs in the UK is primarily based on a platform model that contains important banking data, service provider interfaces ("PIPs") and end users (users). composition.

Specifically,The main goal of the banking company is to create a platform that is fast, secure and efficient, but which only covers the simple tasks required for a CBDC tour. .After receiving approval from central bank and other departmentsAs a stand-alone business, PIPs can connect to critical data and distribute CBDCs to end users, as well as innovate and build additional CBDC functions. Finally, end users can access the CBDC by registering a PIP account.

In addition to the platform model above, this forum also reviewed three of our other CBDC models.These are the full account model, traded token model, and sample LED device.

One of the partners focused on the complex processes involved in the platform and account integration model, and compared the general process of the two models, e.g. registrations, deposits/withdrawals and transfers silver. CBDC payment, etc. We continue to examine the differences between the two data transmission and processing models.

The aforementioned members believe that although some of the characteristics of the two models are similar, the variability of the platform model can be negatively affected because the platform model can create the most desired important uptime and latency data. .

Other members of the meeting believe that the sharing model has certain privacy advantages. As can be seen, in the shared model, the key data only deals with the equivalent in PIP, while the platform model directly contains all the end-user equivalents. End users replace PIPs that do not help compete for business.

As for the writing structure, research by forum members shows that this model protects privacy by separating owner credentials and trades, but also must improve the risk of fraud, the interaction of wallets and devices, and offline features.

Another member added that users must provide certain privacy rights because the standard measure makes the PIP agent user tokens. Additionally, given the difficulty of changing the encryption required, scalability is seen as an issue with this model.

The meeting members agreed that further detailed discussions should take place with the help of various implementations on the CBDC R&D model mentioned above. In addition, some members asked a lot of questions like standards, performance, quality and characteristics, risk prevention, etc., and waited for the R&D evaluation to answer.

Encryption can be used for CBDC privacy protection.

Another key theme of this forum is the privacy of CBDCs, some of whom believe that the CBDC's reliance on privacy and anonymity stems from the current use of money. One of the forum members argued that privacy can be protected by limiting e-wallet balances and large transactions, and that end users should be able to complete an identity certificate, when denial is the engine, preferably, if a stricter restriction is applied to the initial. . Probably not a CBDC promotion.

By the way, some members believe that the privacy of anonymous CBDCs will face even bigger issues, especially with the use of digital encryption technology.

There is also the assumption that private design should be subject to strict adherence to policies such as financial protection, financial fraud prevention, data protection, etc., so it should balance the relationship between privacy and anonymity and protection. Financial Offenses.

As part of the discussion of potential models, forum members raised many questions about CBDC privacy, including how to determine the type of sensitive information created by the CBDC system and its holders, and how to resolve issues. emerging business. . By protecting sensitive data, we see how the model can help address issues such as privacy technologies.