Here you will find the most frequently asked questions about RSK, its vision, technology and other aspects
Navigate our main topics
Changes that aim to improve the network in terms of privacy, scalability, security or ease of use will be proposed by RSK Labs team, as well as the rest of the RSK community. The RSK community must decide by themselves to accept or reject any change proposed by RSK Labs or by any other member of the community. We expect proposals what are aligned with the original RSK whitepaper to be accepted by the community, while proposals that are highly misaligned with the original Whitepaper to be discarded.
RSK Labs has no right to force a hard-fork on the RSK network. Also, RSK LABS WILL NEVER PROPOSE A FORK TO INTERVENE IN A CONFLICTING SITUATION BETWEEN PRIVATE PARTIES (SUCH AS THE DAO EVENT). THE ONLY HARD FORKS THAT RSK WILL EVER PROPOSE ARE THOSE TO IMPROVE THE SECURITY, PRIVACY, FAIRNESS OR FUNCTIONALITY OF THE PLATFORM.
RSK Labs is working on a RSKIP for a protocol codddie-named SIGILO to provide transaction privacy. Some members of the community are also evaluating a zCash-style privacy to RSK.
Also RSK Labs is working on an enterprise version of the RSK platform with PBFT consensus, that provides transaction privacy by default. However, our aim is to help companies to easily integrate with the public RSK platform.
RSK Labs presented an RSKIP to enable user-defined signature schemes (also called “account abstraction”). This means that RSK users will be able to choose other signature schemes for their accounts (for example, a quantum-cryptography-proof schemes). The RSKIP adds to accounts a state-less script that verifies transaction signatures, such as Merkle-Winternitz, RSA, edDSA.
If you cannot find an answer to your question here, contact us