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

See Also