RFP: Private Reads / RPC Privacy
Why It Matters
- Metadata leakage is the "silent killer" of institutional privacy
- Query patterns can reveal more than transaction data (positions, limits, counterparties)
- Institutions often have strict internal rules about data access trails
- Aligns with PSE roadmap emphasis on "private reads" (ORAM/PIR research)
Scope
In-Scope
- Design space analysis for private read approaches:
- ORAM (Oblivious RAM) for state access
- PIR (Private Information Retrieval) for queries
- TEE-based private RPC (with explicit trust analysis)
- Mixnet/anonymization layers
- Benchmark harness for institutional query patterns:
- Portfolio valuation (read-heavy, multiple token balances)
- Eligibility checks (KYC gating, accreditation status)
- Risk checks (position limits, concentration)
- "What leaks where" analysis:
- IP address correlation
- Timing analysis
- Query volume patterns
- Address clustering risks
- Minimal prototype for at least one approach
Out-of-Scope
- Full production implementation
- Network-level anonymity (Tor, mixnets) — mention but don't build
- Transaction privacy (covered by other patterns)
Deliverables
- Design space document comparing ORAM/PIR/TEE approaches
- "What leaks where" threat model for institutional RPC usage
- Benchmark harness for private read latency/throughput
- Minimal prototype (ORAM proxy or TEE-based RPC)
- Recommendations for institutional deployment
Dependencies
Requires:
- PSE ORAM/PIR research context
- Understanding of institutional query patterns
Enables:
- Complete privacy story (reads + writes)
- Input to custody and compliance workflows
- Foundation for "private RPC" infrastructure