Smart Contract Intervention via Judgment Database

Resolve Bottlenecks,
Find Innovative SolutionsGenerate Solutions

Solution Overview

Problem

Distributed ledger systems face challenges in intervening in the execution of smart contracts, particularly when they represent illegal transactions or contain logical errors, due to their immutability, which can prevent stopping the contract's execution.

Innovation Solution

A system comprising a virtual court server, judge systems, and a judgment database that allows for intervention in smart contract operations by evaluating complaints, determining judgments, and recording them in a database, enabling the prevention of contract execution if deemed illegal or faulty.

Engineering Contradictions & Design Principles

VSEngineering Contradiction Analysis

1Reliability

If distributed ledger systems provide immutability of smart contracts, then reliability and data integrity are improved, but the ability to intervene in contract execution deteriorates

Engineering Contradiction:

Improvedata integrityVSAvoidintervention capability

Core Design Contradiction:

ReliabilityVSAdaptability or versatility

Solution Approach 1:

The system performs preliminary actions by recording judgments against smart contracts in a judgment database before the contracts execute. When a contract is launched, the system checks the judgment database in advance to determine if intervention is needed, allowing preventive action before harmful execution occurs.

Inventive Principle:

Principle #10Preliminary action

Solution Approach 2:

The system introduces an intermediary mechanism consisting of a judgment database and checking function that mediates between the immutable smart contract execution and the need for legal intervention. This intermediary layer allows compliance checking without altering the core immutability of the distributed ledger.

Inventive Principle:

Principle #24Intermediary (Mediator)

2Reliability

If smart contracts are made immutable in distributed ledger systems, then execution reliability is improved, but the ability to stop illegal or erroneous contract execution deteriorates

Engineering Contradiction:

Improveexecution reliabilityVSAvoidillegal transaction execution

Core Design Contradiction:

ReliabilityVSObject-affected harmful factors

Solution Approach 1:

The system executes preliminary actions by storing judgments against smart contracts in a judgment database before execution occurs. When a contract is launched, the system checks whether a judgment exists in advance, enabling prevention of illegal or erroneous contract execution before it begins.

Inventive Principle:

Principle #10Preliminary action

Solution Approach 2:

The system implements feedback by checking the judgment database when a smart contract is launched and using this information to determine whether to allow or prevent execution. This feedback loop enables the system to respond to previous legal determinations and adjust contract execution accordingly.

Inventive Principle:

Principle #23Feedback

Data Source

PatentUS10984494B2Systems and methods for interception of smart contracts

Publication Date: 2021.04.20 REFINITIV US ORGANIZATION LLC

AI summary

Intervention in the operation of a smart contract in a distributed ledger system may include: launching execution of the smart contract; upon launching execution of the smart contract, executing a judgment checking function to determine whether a judgment against the smart contract exists in a judgment database; in response to a judgment against the smart contract existing in the judgment database, intervening in the operation of the smart contract to prevent the execution of the smart contract; and in response to no judgment against the smart contract existing in the judgment database, continuing execution of the smart contract.