Open-access DApp on a permissioned or private Blockchain

[ru3x]

Hello,

I am wondering whether there are two independent layers one has to to keep in mind when developing a DApp. One that defines who can access and validate the Blockchain and one that defines who can access the DApp. Aren't those two completely different and independent? Is it e. g. possible to build an open-access DApp (without verification/entry barriers) on a permissioned/private Blockchain? Is it possible to build a restricted DApp on a permissionless or public Blockchain?

Thanks

[vv181]

What are you trying to achieve actually? like what kind of model of the application/system?

In a permissioned or private blockchain, you are in full control to decide who can modify the blockchain and which user is able to access it. So, if you are making it
"open-access", any user could openly access it, nevertheless, if you design it so, without control/participation of the blockchain/consensus mechanism.

You can also make a restricted app on a public blockchain, take the example of Uniswap or Pancakeswap, they are censoring some token smart contracts, which people who are using their front-end could not access. I think you may be able to do it on the smart contract level.

[ru3x]

Hello vv181,

thank you very much for your response. I am studying DeFi theoretically and was wondering whether these combinations are possible in praxis or whether this is excluded by definition. But I think it makes more sense to say: Permissioned/private and permissionless/public are descriptions of the blockchain. What kind of access the end-user has to the DApp is a completely different thing.

I couldn't find any existing discussions on this topic so I came here. And if I understood you correctly, both are possible so these "layers" need to be differentiated.

Thanks

[vv181]

One thing to note/add since you incorporate decentralized apps in a permissionless blockchain. The concept of DApp itself is built based on smart contracts. The blockchain itself doesn't care about who is accessing it, it only follows the consensus rule that is based on the majority.

On the other hand, a smart contract is just executing predefined terms/contracts. Right here is the part where you can restrict the end user.

I am studying DeFi theoretically and was wondering whether these combinations are possible in praxis or whether this is excluded by definition.

Open access on permissioned blockchain is may technically possible, but it will dismiss the definition itself.

[hugeblack]

Let's redefine DApp word, which is decentralized applications, which means that no one party controls them, unfortunately what you say Permissioned/permissionless is against the concept of a blockchain, which allows anyone to take open source code and modify it, but then no one will be forced to follow it, just as happens With a hardfork.

So when we talk about validate, you mean the proof of stake and therefore your words are correct. Validate are people who have a large amount of coins and use them to verify the validity of new transactions in exchange for fees you pay them and they will not try to cheat because they will be the biggest losers, but the average user is the one who sends or keeps the coins own.

[ru3x]

Thanks

"Open access on permissioned blockchain is may technically possible, but it will dismiss the definition itself."

Yes. But not open-access of the DApp right? (To clarify: with open access I mean that any end-user can use the service like borrowing and lending without e. g. KYC verification) Since as you say, the DApp is on a smart contract level and the blockchain on the node level. So if I build a permissioned blockchain where only a few can read the ledger/take part in conensus etc., than this should have no influence on the access of the DApp right?

If you connect to the DApp you do that with a wallet, so you don't become a node or anything on the blockchain. You dont need to read the ledger of submit transactions to it. All of that is done by the DApp. It should therefore be differentiated.

So am I right that this is possible?

[el kaka22]

I am not entirely sure if this is even required? I mean it all comes down to what you want to do exactly, because each instance would have a different answer, but if you are 100% sure that it needs to be done, then I do not see why it shouldn't be. People who think that it can't be done are people who haven't seen it get done yet, and people who say it could be done are developers who have developed something that didn't existed before, and then existed after they developed it.

So yeah, you could "theoretically" get this done, it is not going to be pretty, it will take blood and sweat to get this done and a ton of money, and I mean seriously wall street capital funds levels of money because we are talking about something new, and not ready made template.

[vv181]

So if I build a permissioned blockchain where only a few can read the ledger/take part in conensus etc., than this should have no influence on the access of the DApp right?

Yes.

All of that is done by the DApp. It should therefore be differentiated.

Yep, not only should it be differentiated, but smart contract itself is a different concept than blokckchain. It exists within a blockchain.

So am I right that this is possible?

Correct.

[ru3x]

Thanks! Do you maybe also know an example where this is already implemented?

[vv181]

Do you maybe also know an example where this is already implemented?

An open-access Dapp on a permissioned blockchain? I don't think there is any.

As I have said, it would dismiss the definition itself so that it would be pointless. My main point of it is, that it would be it is theoretically possible.

Just a side note, there is a curated thread where the main topic is about Blockchain. Just in case you are interested to dig further into the subject. Here it is,  Beginners & Help Encyclopedia [UPD: +Electrum Board] : BLOCKCHAIN