= Subscriber content; or subscribe now to access all American Banker content.

Why Banks Are Testing Bitcoin's Blockchain (Without Bitcoin)

Ask a U.S. banker about the prospects for Bitcoin, a digital currency with no trusted central authority or mechanism to reverse transactions, and you're likely to get a lukewarm answer.

But financial institutions are increasingly taking an interest in Bitcoin's recordkeeping system, known as the blockchain, a so-called distributed ledger that can be used to track much more than stateless electronic tokens.

Bank of New York Mellon, for example, has created its own digital currency, BK Coins, and built an employee recognition application that rewards IT staff with the tokens, which can be redeemed for gift cards and vouchers. CBW Bank, an innovative community bank in Weir, Kansas, is building a risk management system incorporating cryptocurrency technology. USAA has a team of researchers looking into the potential of the blockchain.

These institutions see possibilities for efficiency and security improvements in areas like payments and securities handling through the use of the blockchain.

The concept of a distributed ledger would seem to be the antithesis of banking. Banks have always kept all manner of data and records – of payments, transactions, loans, what have you –in their own systems. You could argue that that's what banking is, the business of storing money and information about money.

But when financial institutions talk about the possibilities of the blockchain and distributed ledgers, they usually don't really mean an open, public database that will sustain copies all over the world, like the Bitcoin blockchain. They're usually talking about using a variant of blockchain technology that would live in their own data center or private cloud, or be run by a central authority. (A notable exception is the Nasdaq's experiment with the Bitcoin network as a means to track security ownership.)

"The blockchain can fundamentally reduce costs and provide real-time service," said Chris Skinner, chairman of the Financial Services Club networking group in the U.K. and author of "Digital Bank." "But on the other hand [bankers] want to make it centralized, which runs counter to the concept of blockchain."

Like an accounting ledger in which entries can't be edited once they've been written, the original blockchain's distributed ledger is an indelible record of Bitcoin transactions. Maintenance of the blockchain is performed by a network of computers around the world running Bitcoin software. About six times per hour, a new group of accepted transactions, a block, is created, added to the block chain, and quickly published to all nodes. This allows Bitcoin software to determine when a particular bitcoin amount has been spent, which is necessary to prevent double-spending in an environment without central oversight.

Kept entirely within a bank, a blockchain is "nothing more than an application within multiple nodes," said Suresh Ramamurthi, the chairman and chief technology officer of CBW Bank. "It's a just a great way to have failover systems."

His $12 million-asset bank is working with Ripple Labs, developer of the Ripple protocol, an open-source distributed transaction infrastructure which has its own native digital currency, but can be used to transfer ownership of all sorts of assets.

"We are integrating our existing risk-scoring analytics system to support crypto-currency protocols," Ramamurthi explained. "In most of the existing channels such as check, [automated clearing house] or even debit card, there is a gap between funds availability and funds settlement that helps provide banks some time to manage the risk," but like wire transfers, cryptocurrency allows "instantaneous availability and settlement," removing that helpful cushion of time and reintroducing risks.

"As a bank, you can't enter into any area unless you understand it," Ramamurthi said. "We're using some of these protocols and delving into details on how to understand the gaps and risks of that and integrate them into our risk management system. Once we do that, then we'll start to create applications around it."

Anything that can be defined with a number could be stored in a blockchain-like facility, Ramamurthi said – a payment, a piece of property, a security. "Anything that can be tagged, which is pretty much anything in the world, can be linked and tracked."

Experimenting at BNY Mellon

BNY Mellon's developers downloaded open source code from Bitcoin.org, modified it to run on the bank's internal network, and created BK Coins.

"It's a way for own employees to understand what it is so they can think about the implications for their own work and for our clients," said Suresh Kumar, the $385 billion-asset bank's chief information officer. "It's not that we were interested in Bitcoin, we're more interested in blockchain" – a common refrain among bankers.

It's one of the first projects for the bank's relatively new innovation centers, set up to help employees learn about technology initiatives. "It's not like going to a classroom training or a seminar, but something that people can try themselves and play with it," Kumar said.

Kumar is most interested in using a distributed ledger to track securities and corporate actions.


(6) Comments



Comments (6)
Elegant and inexpensive solution for smarter banks here:

Posted by knowledger | Sunday, October 30 2016 at 3:33PM ET
"Change everything", "revolutionize", and other loud words do not seem to describe the situation well. Working in the Bitcoin field, I more and more tend to think that banks will just exploit public blockchains. Sort of become parasites.

It has been quite some time since anonymity, one-layer p2p, or even immutability were considered the most important attributes of an innovative payment system. Currently, most blockchainers have already given-up any feelings of remorse regarding abandoning what Satoshi said in his white paper’s first 19 words. We now have plenty of blockchains and second layer protocols on top of Bitcoin offering various payment models to choose from. They differ in creativity but not a single one exploits the natural attractiveness of the basic must-have attributes of a payment, namely:

1) Reasonable Respect
To large extent, most payments are given to someone you know or someone you’re interacting with in some way. A plumber fixes your toilet, you pay him; the grocery owner sells you food, you pay her. There’s no strict anonymity here but you do know names and a payment to them should not require knowing anything else. It is not “natural” to know someone’s wire transfer details or even PayPal-connected E-mail address. It is not natural or necessary to know where your receiver has any accounts at all. That’s none of your business. Knowing their name, as they tell you, should be enough to pay them for services rendered.

2) Reasonable Decentralization
When you pay someone, there shouldn’t be any obvious or hidden demands or incentives “to join the network”. To receive a payment from you, your receiver should not depend on whether he opens an account somewhere or takes a risk of owning — even temporarily — a strange asset like crypto coin. You’re going to pay someone some of your wealth for the job done or goods traded, so share that wealth. Don’t make a person invest some additional efforts into anything else beyond the terms of the deal. “This for that” are the terms but often there is a hidden asterisk which mentions, “Just join this site with your full name, birthday, location, and email. Then, enter your KYC to receive payment”. This is ludicrous.
Posted by knowledger | Sunday, October 30 2016 at 3:32PM ET
You get rid of the electricity consumption but you also lose the decentralization too which is the main point of the blockchain. If it is just the bank mining then they are really running a centralized database, not a decentralized system and they don't need a blockchain.
Posted by Milly Bitcoin | Monday, June 01 2015 at 6:49PM ET
The variant of the blockchain used is probably that uses some form of proof of stake, not proof of work to "time stamp" the blockchain. You get rid of the electricity consumption this way.
Posted by endmathabusenow | Monday, June 01 2015 at 5:39PM ET
BNY Mellon's digital currency program is internal, it's running only on the bank's servers.
Posted by pennycrosman | Monday, June 01 2015 at 4:19PM ET
This discussion does not make sense. The Bitcoin tokens are given away as an incentive for bitcoin miners to process the transactions and maintain the decentralized ledger. If you give the tokens to bank employees only there is no incentive for random people to use their resources to maintain and secure a blockchain for some random bank.
Posted by Milly Bitcoin | Monday, June 01 2015 at 4:15PM ET
Add Your Comments:
Not Registered?
You must be registered to post a comment. Click here to register.
Already registered? Log in here
Please note you must now log in with your email address and password.