Ripple replaces mining with a system of "validators." These special nodes use consensus to agree in which transactions to include in the next ledger. Their decisions are broadcast through the network as messages signed with their public key. Each node (computer running the rippled software) in the RCL network is responsible for deciding its "UNL" (which stands for Unique Node List). This list controls which validators the node cares about.
For everyone on the network to agree on the same ledger chain, there are various rules about how the UNL should be formed. Specifically that there should be a minimum amount of overlap of people's UNLs. We won't get into that here.
The most important factor in choosing this UNL, is to make sure that you pick validators which are not colluding. There is a set of rules and best practices for validators to enforce this. The most important is that
validators must be publicly identified. For example, if hypothetically Microsoft is running a validator then it should publish its public key in a way that certifies Microsoft is under control of the validator. An easy way to do this is to put a text file with the public key at the company's domain, reachable via HTTPS with a known certificate. For example at
https://microsoft.com/ripple.txtNow I am looking at this masternode system of Dash and it seems to be that its essentially the same as Ripple validators (with minor technical differences). But in Dash,
the masternodes identity is secret. This is exactly the scenario that Ripple describes as insecure!
Am I missing something here?
