text
stringlengths
0
2.35k
[693.90 --> 697.86] So once something was written in the history, the database cannot say that,
[697.86 --> 699.24] oh, it was something different.
[699.24 --> 700.40] It cannot lie to you.
[700.42 --> 704.16] Because if it would lie, then you will immediately see this.
[704.16 --> 706.52] Because of this mathematical proof.
[706.72 --> 711.98] So if there is something crucial like audit logs, which after some time,
[712.34 --> 715.58] you may want to do some investigation what happened over time.
[715.58 --> 718.08] This gives us extra protection.
[718.08 --> 720.82] But you can rely on this information.
[721.04 --> 727.22] Because database has proven that up to this point in time, it is consistent with the whole
[727.22 --> 727.62] history.
[728.16 --> 728.24] Okay.
[728.54 --> 728.82] Okay.
[728.82 --> 734.96] I think you were covering a lot of problems that are addressed by immutability databases.
[735.56 --> 739.56] First, I would like to clarify, immutability is an overloaded term.
[740.06 --> 746.46] Because as Shonin, you were mentioning, with immutability, we usually refer to systems or
[746.46 --> 753.16] data structures that are a pen only, that treat changes or updates as a new data, actually.
[753.16 --> 759.40] So when we are doing an update of a record, we are not mutating the original record, but
[759.40 --> 763.64] treating the update as a new record, describing the change.
[764.38 --> 767.50] So we are used to that for immutability.
[767.80 --> 774.12] And actually, ImmuDB relies on every component in ImmuDB is an appen only data structure.
[774.64 --> 778.12] Even the cryptographic data structure are treated as appen only.
[778.12 --> 784.86] But in immutability in databases or even in blockchain, we tend to refer to another thing,
[785.06 --> 791.92] not just to append only, but to the possibility to verify that the history hasn't changed.
[792.66 --> 798.08] So every record is registered and cryptographic linked to what happened before.
[798.08 --> 805.12] And then you have a way to verify if a given transaction or a given record was present and
[805.12 --> 808.70] was not modified anymore once it was written.
[809.32 --> 813.98] Doesn't mean that you cannot have the current state of your balance account.
[814.62 --> 820.76] And as a traditional database, you will have either as the current, the latest value that
[820.76 --> 825.92] was placed for a given record, because the record will be the key that identifies the address
[825.92 --> 827.22] or the balance.
[827.82 --> 833.66] But also, depending on the use case, it may be a cumulative set of changes, like in Git,
[833.76 --> 835.48] where we are committing changes.
[836.14 --> 840.78] So the current state or the history, it's independent of that.
[841.14 --> 844.88] What we refer to this type of thing is verifiable.
[844.88 --> 852.12] I prefer the term verifiable database rather than immutable database, because every system
[852.12 --> 854.04] has integrity checks, right?
[854.14 --> 860.84] Internal integrity checks to check the consistency of a given record or of a given file, if it
[860.84 --> 864.86] was consistent, is consistent or not.
[865.36 --> 871.14] But with tampering detection, it's like giving the possibility to the client application or the
[871.14 --> 876.60] application that is using the database to do their integrity validation by themselves.
[877.14 --> 878.46] That is one of the differences.
[879.00 --> 884.50] It's the application that is receiving the data from the database who is able to run the
[884.50 --> 891.72] integrity check to validate that the data that was received was not modified since it was
[891.72 --> 892.08] written.
[892.38 --> 894.12] Okay, let's pull on that thread a little bit.
[894.12 --> 901.50] So we're not talking about the clients sort of being or maintaining a copy of whatever
[901.50 --> 906.90] data you might have at a central sort of immutable database or verifiable database, right?
[906.92 --> 911.88] You're talking about some sort of a cryptographic verifiability of the data.
[912.12 --> 918.92] So one of the particularities of an immutable database is that at every moment, the complete
[918.92 --> 922.38] state of the database is captured by a hash value.
[922.38 --> 929.28] So that denotes not only the current state, but what the complete history of changes up
[929.28 --> 929.92] to that point.
[930.46 --> 937.42] So the client in InModb, for instance, or in other immutable databases, is the client who
[937.42 --> 940.06] needs to keep track of this current state.
[940.52 --> 947.38] The latest state that is known is like in the example that Bar mentioned regarding your bank
[947.38 --> 952.74] bank balance account, you may know what was the latest state that you can trust.
[953.20 --> 957.14] And based on that and the new changes is where you can compare.
[957.38 --> 962.56] You have the base to compare the new changes or the new results and so on.
[962.68 --> 968.22] So, but the client only needs to keep track of the state of the database at any given point.
[968.36 --> 970.10] That is the minimal information.
[970.10 --> 974.60] So to make sure I understand this, that means that deleting records also isn't permissible.
[975.00 --> 975.52] Is that true?
[975.88 --> 977.56] Deletion is actually depending.
[977.90 --> 979.08] We have two levels.
[979.46 --> 982.40] We have logical deletion or physical deletion.
[982.86 --> 988.08] Logical deletion is something that can be handled by the application or by the server.
[988.48 --> 993.54] But the difference will be in terms of performance because the filtering out of the information will
[993.54 --> 997.88] be done much faster if it's done directly by the database.
[997.88 --> 1005.10] In NemoDB, we currently have support for logical deletion in both manners, like deleting a key,
[1005.18 --> 1008.28] for instance, or by providing an expiration date.
[1008.90 --> 1011.86] But this currently is just a logical deletion.
[1012.04 --> 1014.14] This means the data will be still there.
[1014.60 --> 1018.66] It will be automatically filtered out and the client won't receive it.
[1018.92 --> 1021.28] But it's not yet physically deleted.
[1022.02 --> 1026.16] And we are under discussions to incorporate physical deletion of data.
[1026.16 --> 1032.98] And it's a very, very interesting topic to discuss what involves physically deleting the data
[1032.98 --> 1035.46] and yet being able to prove.
[1035.78 --> 1042.20] So depending on the data you delete or you remove, is the possibility you have later on to build proof.
[1042.76 --> 1044.60] So it's a very, very interesting topic.
[1045.14 --> 1045.22] Yeah.
[1045.22 --> 1049.48] And I'm assuming we're going to want to talk about good use cases for an immutable database.
[1049.84 --> 1053.62] But I guess the first thing that comes to my mind is I feel like you'd have to be careful
[1053.62 --> 1058.84] as to what applications you use this for because there are rules like GDPR where you have to be able
[1058.84 --> 1060.18] to forget people, essentially.
[1060.84 --> 1064.74] And I could imagine a weird situation where you write something to an immutable database
[1064.74 --> 1067.90] accidentally and then realize, like, how do we fix this?
[1067.90 --> 1074.98] And actually, GDPR is the main reason why we started actually thinking about physical deletion
[1074.98 --> 1083.44] because some laws require from you to make sure that the data is not accessible at all after some time.
[1083.80 --> 1089.04] Of course, the rules are not clear because sometimes you have to hide the data from the users,
[1089.04 --> 1094.54] but then you have to keep it for a longer time because there may be some kind of investigation later on.
[1094.54 --> 1098.72] But still, it is possible to actually remove the data.
[1098.94 --> 1103.78] And maybe there is a different reason for that because if you have append-only structure,
[1104.00 --> 1109.08] append-only data, and you start putting too much data into it, you will just run out of space.
[1109.86 --> 1115.16] And after sometimes you want to reclaim maybe the space or you have physical constraints of your server
[1115.16 --> 1118.48] and you have to deal with that and there is a production system running.
[1118.48 --> 1126.26] So maybe you want to just wipe data that is older than some point in time in the past.
[1127.18 --> 1134.60] And still, the state, as Hiromimo said, the state of the database, the hash of the database contains all the history.
[1135.24 --> 1137.08] So this is a very interesting topic.
[1137.22 --> 1143.38] So you no longer have the data, but the state needs to calculate this data in