The case against blockchain for identity
blog.tokenize.io
blog.tokenize.io
There are heaps of blockchain companies claiming to use blockchain to store large amounts of data. However, the ability to scale and store that seems disproportionate.
Maybe something like IPFS + a blockchain could be used, but the immutability is lost the moment its stored on a file store. The blockchain just acts as a pointer.
But it's far from immutable. Torrents die every day because people stop hosting them. The best thing you can do to keep an important but unpopular file alive is ongoing upkeep: host it on your own infrastructure, or pay for an Amazon S3 torrent.
IPFS and filecoins are exactly the same. The availability depends on either popularity, running your own server and hoping you don't have a fire, or ongoing payments for redundant storage.
That's not immutable.
Blockchain has a much stronger immutability guarantee, because everyone involved is economically incentivised to maintain every single transaction that ever took place, no matter how insignificant.
So the links themselves are immutable but the content might not be available.
Strong transaction ordering can give you proof of existence at a certain point in time, but that's not useful in an identity context.