mirror of
https://github.com/lux-apps/papers.git
synced 2026-10-30 18:15:21 +00:00
Every rendered "T-Chain" / "ThresholdVM" / "teleportvm" reference across the paper corpus is rewritten to the correct canonical chain by concern: threshold signing / MPC / bridge custody / key recovery -> M-Chain (MVM); FHE / encrypted compute / threshold decryption -> F-Chain (FVM); teleport / cross-chain messaging -> B-Chain (bridgevm); consensus Pulsar stays Q-Chain. Section lux-trust-kernel/03-t-chain-threshold-governance.tex renamed -> 03-f-chain-encrypted-policy.tex (with \input + xref fixes). Braided "T-Chain" sections split by concern (M vs F). Only lp-020's chain-separation rationale and the shared lux/chains/thresholdvm library path retain the name, to record the removal. All changed papers rebuilt (pdflatex, rc=0, no undefined refs). §09 of lux-dao-governance-framework reframed: fabricated "production deployment" metrics ($50M/$240k/$12M, survey %s, "as of Oct 2024") relabeled as illustrative design configurations with no invented replacements; reality noted (DAO treasury is a 1/1 Safe); conclusion echo + one "first production" overclaim softened. This commit also captures concurrent corpus workstreams on the same tree. Co-authored-by: Hanzo Dev <[email protected]>
83 lines
3.6 KiB
TeX
83 lines
3.6 KiB
TeX
|
|
%% ===================================================================
|
|
%% LP-134 canonical naming (2025-12-15):
|
|
%% Per LP-134 (Lux Chain Topology), M-Chain has been split into:
|
|
%% M-Chain — MPC ceremonies for bridge custody of EXTERNAL wallets
|
|
%% (CGGMP21, FROST, Pulsar-general)
|
|
%% F-Chain — FHE compute + TFHE bootstrap-key generation (encrypted EVM)
|
|
%% M-Chain is REMOVED entirely; teleport is B-Chain (bridgevm, LP-6000). No teleportvm.
|
|
%% Where this paper says "M-Chain MPC" / "M-Chain threshold governance" /
|
|
%% "M-Chain TFHE" / "M-Chain custody", read as M-Chain (MPC) or F-Chain (FHE).
|
|
%% ===================================================================
|
|
|
|
\section{Shared Workspaces}
|
|
\label{sec:workspaces}
|
|
|
|
A shared workspace is a capsule whose access control policy grants
|
|
multiple users read, write, or admin permissions. The threshold
|
|
primitive enables fine-grained collaborative access without a
|
|
central server that holds all keys.
|
|
|
|
\subsection{Access Control via Threshold Decryption}
|
|
|
|
Workspace data is encrypted under a workspace key $k_W$. The key is
|
|
not held by any single user. Instead, it is distributed as a $(t, n)$
|
|
threshold key among workspace members:
|
|
|
|
\begin{definition}[Workspace Threshold Access]
|
|
A workspace $W$ with members $\{M_1, \ldots, M_n\}$ and access threshold
|
|
$t$ encrypts data under key $k_W$ where $k_W$ is a threshold key requiring
|
|
$t$ member key shares for decryption. Different access levels map to
|
|
different thresholds:
|
|
\begin{itemize}
|
|
\item \textbf{Read}: $t_{\text{read}} = 1$ (any member can read)
|
|
\item \textbf{Write}: $t_{\text{write}} = 1$ (any member can write, with CRDT merge for conflicts)
|
|
\item \textbf{Admin}: $t_{\text{admin}} = \lceil n/2 \rceil + 1$ (majority required for policy changes)
|
|
\end{itemize}
|
|
\end{definition}
|
|
|
|
For the common case of $t_{\text{read}} = 1$, each member holds a copy of
|
|
the workspace key encrypted under their personal key. This avoids the
|
|
latency of threshold decryption for reads while preserving threshold
|
|
control for administrative actions.
|
|
|
|
\subsection{Collaborative Editing with CRDTs}
|
|
|
|
Workspace documents use Conflict-free Replicated Data Types (CRDTs)
|
|
\cite{shapiro2011crdt} for concurrent editing. Each member edits their
|
|
local encrypted copy, generating CRDT operations that are encrypted and
|
|
broadcast to other members via relay providers. Merging happens locally
|
|
on each member's device:
|
|
|
|
\begin{equation}
|
|
\mathsf{Doc}_{M_i} = \mathsf{Merge}(\mathsf{Doc}_{M_i}, \mathsf{Decrypt}(k_W, \mathsf{ops}_{M_j}))
|
|
\end{equation}
|
|
|
|
No server sees plaintext. The CRDT guarantees eventual consistency:
|
|
all members converge to the same document state regardless of the
|
|
order in which operations are applied.
|
|
|
|
\subsection{Member Management}
|
|
|
|
Adding or removing workspace members requires threshold admin approval:
|
|
|
|
\begin{enumerate}
|
|
\item A member proposes adding/removing a user.
|
|
\item The proposal is submitted as an M-Chain threshold approval flow
|
|
with $t_{\text{admin}}$ threshold.
|
|
\item When approved, the workspace key is re-shared to include/exclude
|
|
the affected member.
|
|
\item For member removal, the workspace key is rotated (generating a
|
|
fresh key and re-encrypting all data) to ensure the removed member
|
|
cannot decrypt future updates.
|
|
\end{enumerate}
|
|
|
|
\begin{proposition}[Forward Secrecy on Member Removal]
|
|
After a member $M_r$ is removed and the workspace key is rotated, $M_r$
|
|
cannot decrypt any data written after the rotation epoch, even if $M_r$
|
|
retains their old key share. This follows from the key independence
|
|
property: the new workspace key $k_W'$ is generated independently of
|
|
$k_W$ and is never encrypted under $M_r$'s personal key.
|
|
\end{proposition}
|
|
|