How twisted can things get when an anonymous piece of code harms people but can’t be stopped? Two cinematic masterpieces offer us devastating answers and lots of food for thought:

And if it’s code, why couldn’t it be a smart contract? Could harmful programs be launched onto blockchains and live there forever? Close your eyes and stretch your imagination towards 2030, when the world could play host to webs of code, data and physical devices that are immune to external regulation, empowered to carry to extremes the depravity or immorality of its creators. Here are some disturbing scenarios that become possible:

Very much like malicious AI, blockchain viruses and DACOs can take a life of their own as long as someone benefits from having them and can sustain markets around them. What can we do to prevent the rise of viruses and DACOs in the blockchain economy? The answers aren’t simple, but here are a few thoughts:

  1. Built-in governance in blockchains- blockchains such as Tezos are trying to raise awareness to the topic of governance, but both they and Ethereum haven’t passed the test of time when it comes to controversial or malicious contracts. Human moderation and voting are powerful ways to eliminate malicious content that’s been reported. Blockchain “anti-viruses” and mandatory code reviews can come later as the industry matures
  2. Forks- if the predetermined blockchain governance doesn’t eliminate certain bad content, communities can hard-fork the network into a cleaner version (just like Ethereum was forked into ETC after the DAO attack). However, forks are extremely expensive to the ecosystem. Even worse, as long as someone (even 5% of the original ecosystem) will see the economic benefit in serving “blockchain viruses”, those viruses will be able to find infrastructure to run on
  3. Regulation & Enforcement- the examples above prove (again) that governments and blockchains are on a collision course in the long term, with blockchain money being the canary in the coalmine. As the case of Silk Road proved, proactive governments are the ultimate actor in securing our world. The key to preventing many (but not all) blockchain viruses is in controlling infrastructure, especially when it comes to physical devices and online-offline exchange of information. If countries want to prevent the rise of blockchain viruses and DACO’s, they should tightly control the flow of real-world information to blockchain code (e.g. biometric data, videos or transactions from the banking system). They may also want to control the exchange of crypto-to-fiat (centralized exchanges currently suffer problems with banks, but a compliant centralized exchange can be a government’s best friend in the long term). Finally, they should strive to decide what physical infrastructure can be offered via blockchains (should people be allowed to launch smart-contract controlled delivery networks, or smart-contract controlled 3D printing services?).
  4. Defense by offense- active cyber defense is an interesting emerging weapon in traditional cybersecurity. Can we run networks code and devices (whether on blockchain or not) that would proactively detect, counter, and mislead bad actors? Who would launch and fund the operations of such networks?

Can the vision of unstoppable, open, market-driven networks turn into a nightmarish anarchy? Are law enforcers equipped with the right technology and skills for such a world? Future real world battlefields may not be about heroes with fast cars, gadgets or superpowers- but talented coders in a virtual cat-and-mouse game. Stay tuned.

Thanks to my friends Michelle Lai, Thomas Glucksmann, Benjamin Joffe and Itamar Har Even for their thoughtful feedback & contributions