7 ms·

California DMV puts 42M car titles on blockchain to fight fraud

44 points by jc_811 2y ago

jc_811 2y ago
A question I have is, is this a real implementation of blockchain? Or a marketing implementation. If it’s real, and someone somehow steals someone else’s title (eg elderly scam or something of the sort) - does this mean there’s no recourse? Or is the state a centralized power that can re-assign titles at will? In that case, would a strongly managed traditional database have worked? Genuinely trying to understand what blockchain brings to to the table here when taking into account real world issues and mistakes.
- dmazzoni 2y ago
  I sincerely hope this is just marketing, because none of the actual properties of blockchain make any sense whatsoever for this type of application. Blockchain is decentralized. Why would you want that property for vehicle ownership that's specific to one department of a particular U.S. state? Having servers around the world sounds like a security risk, not an actual benefit to Californians. Blockchain transactions are permanent. How is that helpful if a title is stolen, or transferred fraudulently, or illegally? What if a transaction contains sensitive or private information, or inappropriate language?
  - cschneid 2y ago
    also there are legal ways to force somebody to give up a title without their consent. Lawsuits, divorce and so on.
    - toomuchtodo 2y ago
      That’s why blockchain is dumb. It doesn’t replace the law. It’s performance art business logic that still has to adhere to the law.
  - throwthrowuknow 2y ago
    Blockchains don’t have to be decentralized and you can undo a transaction by making a new transaction that reverses the changes.
    - 7thaccount 2y ago
      What's the point than?
      - admax88qqq 2y ago
        Auditable history.
        Legend2440 2y ago
        You don't need blockchain for that, you can just use git.
        admax88qqq 2y ago
        Git is a blockchain
        Legend2440 2y ago
        No; it's a hash tree. Blockchain is also a hash tree, but not all hash trees are blockchain. They've been around since the 70s.
        admax88qqq 2y ago
        They’re functionally equivalent these days. Blockchain has become marketing speak mostly. But if you squint a little. The history of a git branch sure looks a lot like a blockchain (or vice versa). You have a ledger of records (commits), that are append only, and each commit contains a merkle or hash tree (git tree object) So yeah git is basically a blockchain.
- sdwr 2y ago
  Obviously, the features that combat fraud are public attention and immutable history. The most important feature is the history of transactions, which won't be able to be modified by state employees, even once mistakes are amended. I'm disappointed that people who should be able to see through the hype, into the actual tech, are falling for the anti-hype in the same reflexive, unthinking manner as those falling for the actual hype.
  - tracker1 2y ago
    Decision makers are more likely to fall for the marketing fluff of the consulting companies pushing this stuff over their own employees telling them they don't need it. Having worked for an election services company, it truly irked me every time "blockchain" was mentioned to solve X problems. Unless you're in an untrusted, adversarial context with multiple parties, blockchain gets you nothing over just regular data signing with public-private keys/certs, but the added problems of latency and compute costs. This is true of most regulatory situations. Blockchain could be something the banks and federal reserve could use for exchanges instead of the existing networks, but that's a very different use case.
    - sundbry 2y ago
      Electronic voting is an untrusted, adversarial context. It seems you are part of the problem there, not the solution.
      - solardev 2y ago
        Indeed, they are some of the least secure systems out there, black boxes where votes go to die. One was run by someone who was proudly fundraising for Bush and later accused of insider trading. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Premier_Election_Solutions?wprov=sfla1 https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Premier_Election_Solutions?wpr... The industry was trying very hard to monopolize before antitrust stopped them. The whole entire industry is a threat to democracy and should be made illegal and replaced with auditable paper trails. Or yes, even a blockchain would be safer, but that wouldn't be anonymous.
      - 2y ago
- LorenPechtel 2y ago
  Because "blockchain" is more than crypto. It's about an immutable, verifiable transaction history.
  - goalonetwo 2y ago
    you only need that if you have multiple adversarial parties that all want to commit to a shared immutable history. This is a use case with a single source of truth (the DMV). So again, why do we need a blockchain?
  - 0cf8612b2e1e 2y ago
    To make sure the DMV does not alter their own records? They are the ultimate authority on the topic.
    - Scramblejams 2y ago
      Insider threat?
vsuperpower2021 2y ago
California DMV is notoriously bad even outside of California. This could either lessen the pain a bit, or cause immense human suffering. >The project, in collaboration with tech company Oxhead Alpha on Ava Labs' Avalanche blockchain, will allow California's more than 39 million residents to claim their vehicle titles through a mobile app, the first such move in the United States. I'm not sure I'd download a car. It seems like you're relying on the app to verify you, which is fine, but I don't see how any of this works more than a normal database. Why even write an article on technology if you don't have any information or technical expertise?
- laweijfmvo 2y ago
  every time i move, they continue sending all my DMV related mail to my old address. it's a massive failure for something so ... boring.
  - floam 2y ago
    They don’t use address service to update your address when your mail is forwarded to the new address?
goalonetwo 2y ago
So no different than a database. Why did this need to be a blockchain. The information comes from a centralized database anyways
- ams92 2y ago
  Yeah and 42M records is not prohibitively large.
  - laweijfmvo 2y ago
    it's miniscule. every resident could own 10, or 100 vehicles and sqlite would still handle it just fine.
- spelunker 2y ago
  If you want a slower, expensive database, than blockchain might be for you!
ceejayoz 2y ago
I'm pretty dubious about this reporting. > the agency and its technology partners exclusively told Reuters No quote from the agency, the reporter's based in Bangalore, and the only corroboration I can find of any such project is breathless PR pieces that, again, don't cite the agency at all.
- mpeg 2y ago
  I think it's probably real. Deloitte won this contract years ago and they have a blockchain division, California also has a blockchain working group within govt which among other things had suggested putting car and house titles in the blockchain as early as in 2020. I shudder to think how much all this is going to cost the CA taxpayer... apparently the Deloitte contract was $46m. As a technologist I am appalled at the cost, as a consultant I'm jealous!
  - ceejayoz 2y ago
    If it's real, my suspicion is someone stood up a private blockchain that functions as a copy/replication of the real DMV database that'll still be consulted for anything meaningful and called it a day.
    - mpeg 2y ago
      They're using AVAX so it's probably a custom Avalanche L1 – that's the whole point of Avalanche, they get to benefit from the public validators on the AVAX network but they can fully manage validator membership in their private L1 The people involved in this are fairly legit so I doubt they're going to do it just for show. Now the question is: did it need a blockchain solution? probably not
  - goalonetwo 2y ago
    Ah yes Deloitte. Always there to sell the latest hype technology.
upon_drumhead 2y ago
Are there no taxes or fees associated with title transfers in California?
- fsckboy 2y ago
  those are currently collected at the time of registration (the license plates, which don't transfer with the title). With this technology, collection could start when the change appears on the block chain.
skybrian 2y ago
I’m pretty skeptical about this one. Why hasn’t the California DMV published a press release about it?
BobAliceInATree 2y ago
Blockchain only makes sense for Decentralized uses. DMV records, by their very nature, are the epitome of a centralized authority of knowledge. This is a waste of time, money and CO2.
- fsckboy 2y ago
  When I sell my car to you, I sign the back of my title and hand it to you with the keys. When I borrow money to buy a car, that's between me and the bank, also not the DMV. Those are the real epitomes, epitomes of decentralization. "Some look at was is and say 'NIH' (or an equivalent bureaucracy, the DMV). Others look at what could be and 'tap yes to complete transfer'." -- Not Quite JFK
  - yashg 2y ago
    Not sure how it works in the US, but in India when sell a car, we have to get the registration transferred to the new owner. Till the new owner doesn't get the car transferred to their name, the old owner is legally responsible for anything that happens due to the car. Also when we borrow money to buy the car, the hypothecation is recorded on car's registration certificate and ownership records. When the loan is repaid, we have to get it removed by submitting closure documents to authorities. So like a property transaction, change of title also needs to be recorded in official records.
daft_pink 2y ago
Have they considered that this might increase fraud and not decrease fraud? Having your vehicle title digitally stored in a blockchain wallet on your phone seems like an invitation to fraud and scammers compared to the current vehicle title experience, where most title’s are held directly and managed by creditors, ie Bank’s with high credit ratings and extensive audits and high internal control procedures. My interpretation is that a blockchain based title system is better for the state to collect sales taxes as the title chain is more auditable and obvious, but that this will offer little to no benefit to the consumer.
- arcticbull 2y ago
  Not your keys, not your car. I too yearn for a return to bearer instruments outside of the train robberies of Red Dead.
- throwthrowuknow 2y ago
  I’d assume they are centrally managing all changes made to the blockchain, basically just using it as a database, so they should be able to implement whatever security measures they want before a transaction is approved.
- m463 2y ago
  I wonder about fraud too. What does the "claim your title" process mean? I'm sure 99% of people will not "claim" their title. Can you just walk up to a car, take a snapshot of the VIN on the windshield and the license plate and claim someone's title? If you need the name, lots of people have that information available on or in their car. (also if blockchain uses lots of energy will this make vehicles even more carbon negative?)
mindcandy 2y ago
As a drooling crypto bro, a single organization creating a blockchain by itself for itself doesn't actually accomplish anything. Blockchains enable decentralized trust. And, there's nothing decentralized if a single org controls everything on the chain. Corporate/Government attribution chains can make sense. But, only for rare circumstances because the primary requirement is relinquishment of control on the part of the Corpo or Govt. Truly rare indeed... So, if a group of organizations want to make attestments, and if they all want to be able to recognize those attestments, but they do not want any one of them to be in control of the records, then it can make sense. So, the articles example of digital car titles could possibly make sense if multiple states get on board. And, maaaaybe it would make sense for car dealerships to be able to participate directly. Preferably with some sort of on-chain collateral as a fraud deterrent. But, even this would need to be fleshed out a lot before I'd get excited about it.
- thrill 2y ago
  Getting multiple states onboard requires at least one state to begin the process.
wantsanagent 2y ago
I look forward to the day when losing my phone also means losing provable ownership of my car!
yashg 2y ago
Such articles shilling blockchain had disappeared for some time. It seems they are back. Yet another in a series of good old IT project that doesn't actually need "blockchain" but uses the term to make headlines. Here in India I use an app provided by RTO (India's equivalent of DMV) where I can see my car's registration details, insurance, PUC (Pollution Certificate) and even my driving licenses details. There's another app that shows my traffic rules violation tickets and I can even pay the fines online if there are any. None of it requires "blockchain". This project is most probably using the good old SQL database at the backend to store actual data and there's an app front end. Even if uses a blockchain - it's a private blockchain and offers zero benefits over a regular database.
deleted 2y ago
[deleted]

44 points by jc_811 2y ago

A question I have is, is this a real implementation of blockchain? Or a marketing implementation. If it’s real, and someone somehow steals someone else’s title (eg elderly scam or something of the sort) - does this mean there’s no recourse? Or is the state a centralized power that can re-assign titles at will? In that case, would a strongly managed traditional database have worked? Genuinely trying to understand what blockchain brings to to the table here when taking into account real world issues and mistakes.

dmazzoni 2y ago
I sincerely hope this is just marketing, because none of the actual properties of blockchain make any sense whatsoever for this type of application. Blockchain is decentralized. Why would you want that property for vehicle ownership that's specific to one department of a particular U.S. state? Having servers around the world sounds like a security risk, not an actual benefit to Californians. Blockchain transactions are permanent. How is that helpful if a title is stolen, or transferred fraudulently, or illegally? What if a transaction contains sensitive or private information, or inappropriate language?
- cschneid 2y ago
  also there are legal ways to force somebody to give up a title without their consent. Lawsuits, divorce and so on.
  - toomuchtodo 2y ago
    That’s why blockchain is dumb. It doesn’t replace the law. It’s performance art business logic that still has to adhere to the law.
- throwthrowuknow 2y ago
  Blockchains don’t have to be decentralized and you can undo a transaction by making a new transaction that reverses the changes.
  - 7thaccount 2y ago
    What's the point than?
    - admax88qqq 2y ago
      Auditable history.
      - Legend2440 2y ago
        You don't need blockchain for that, you can just use git.
        admax88qqq 2y ago
        Git is a blockchain
        Legend2440 2y ago
        No; it's a hash tree. Blockchain is also a hash tree, but not all hash trees are blockchain. They've been around since the 70s.
        admax88qqq 2y ago
        They’re functionally equivalent these days. Blockchain has become marketing speak mostly. But if you squint a little. The history of a git branch sure looks a lot like a blockchain (or vice versa). You have a ledger of records (commits), that are append only, and each commit contains a merkle or hash tree (git tree object) So yeah git is basically a blockchain.
sdwr 2y ago
Obviously, the features that combat fraud are public attention and immutable history. The most important feature is the history of transactions, which won't be able to be modified by state employees, even once mistakes are amended. I'm disappointed that people who should be able to see through the hype, into the actual tech, are falling for the anti-hype in the same reflexive, unthinking manner as those falling for the actual hype.
- tracker1 2y ago
  Decision makers are more likely to fall for the marketing fluff of the consulting companies pushing this stuff over their own employees telling them they don't need it. Having worked for an election services company, it truly irked me every time "blockchain" was mentioned to solve X problems. Unless you're in an untrusted, adversarial context with multiple parties, blockchain gets you nothing over just regular data signing with public-private keys/certs, but the added problems of latency and compute costs. This is true of most regulatory situations. Blockchain could be something the banks and federal reserve could use for exchanges instead of the existing networks, but that's a very different use case.
  - sundbry 2y ago
    Electronic voting is an untrusted, adversarial context. It seems you are part of the problem there, not the solution.
    - solardev 2y ago
      Indeed, they are some of the least secure systems out there, black boxes where votes go to die. One was run by someone who was proudly fundraising for Bush and later accused of insider trading. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Premier_Election_Solutions?wprov=sfla1 https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Premier_Election_Solutions?wpr... The industry was trying very hard to monopolize before antitrust stopped them. The whole entire industry is a threat to democracy and should be made illegal and replaced with auditable paper trails. Or yes, even a blockchain would be safer, but that wouldn't be anonymous.
    - 2y ago
LorenPechtel 2y ago
Because "blockchain" is more than crypto. It's about an immutable, verifiable transaction history.
- goalonetwo 2y ago
  you only need that if you have multiple adversarial parties that all want to commit to a shared immutable history. This is a use case with a single source of truth (the DMV). So again, why do we need a blockchain?
- 0cf8612b2e1e 2y ago
  To make sure the DMV does not alter their own records? They are the ultimate authority on the topic.
  - Scramblejams 2y ago
    Insider threat?

vsuperpower2021 2y ago

California DMV is notoriously bad even outside of California. This could either lessen the pain a bit, or cause immense human suffering. >The project, in collaboration with tech company Oxhead Alpha on Ava Labs' Avalanche blockchain, will allow California's more than 39 million residents to claim their vehicle titles through a mobile app, the first such move in the United States. I'm not sure I'd download a car. It seems like you're relying on the app to verify you, which is fine, but I don't see how any of this works more than a normal database. Why even write an article on technology if you don't have any information or technical expertise?

laweijfmvo 2y ago
every time i move, they continue sending all my DMV related mail to my old address. it's a massive failure for something so ... boring.
- floam 2y ago
  They don’t use address service to update your address when your mail is forwarded to the new address?

goalonetwo 2y ago

So no different than a database. Why did this need to be a blockchain. The information comes from a centralized database anyways

ams92 2y ago
Yeah and 42M records is not prohibitively large.
- laweijfmvo 2y ago
  it's miniscule. every resident could own 10, or 100 vehicles and sqlite would still handle it just fine.
spelunker 2y ago
If you want a slower, expensive database, than blockchain might be for you!

ceejayoz 2y ago

I'm pretty dubious about this reporting. > the agency and its technology partners exclusively told Reuters No quote from the agency, the reporter's based in Bangalore, and the only corroboration I can find of any such project is breathless PR pieces that, again, don't cite the agency at all.

mpeg 2y ago
I think it's probably real. Deloitte won this contract years ago and they have a blockchain division, California also has a blockchain working group within govt which among other things had suggested putting car and house titles in the blockchain as early as in 2020. I shudder to think how much all this is going to cost the CA taxpayer... apparently the Deloitte contract was $46m. As a technologist I am appalled at the cost, as a consultant I'm jealous!
- ceejayoz 2y ago
  If it's real, my suspicion is someone stood up a private blockchain that functions as a copy/replication of the real DMV database that'll still be consulted for anything meaningful and called it a day.
  - mpeg 2y ago
    They're using AVAX so it's probably a custom Avalanche L1 – that's the whole point of Avalanche, they get to benefit from the public validators on the AVAX network but they can fully manage validator membership in their private L1 The people involved in this are fairly legit so I doubt they're going to do it just for show. Now the question is: did it need a blockchain solution? probably not
- goalonetwo 2y ago
  Ah yes Deloitte. Always there to sell the latest hype technology.

upon_drumhead 2y ago

Are there no taxes or fees associated with title transfers in California?

fsckboy 2y ago
those are currently collected at the time of registration (the license plates, which don't transfer with the title). With this technology, collection could start when the change appears on the block chain.

skybrian 2y ago

I’m pretty skeptical about this one. Why hasn’t the California DMV published a press release about it?

BobAliceInATree 2y ago

Blockchain only makes sense for Decentralized uses. DMV records, by their very nature, are the epitome of a centralized authority of knowledge. This is a waste of time, money and CO2.

fsckboy 2y ago
When I sell my car to you, I sign the back of my title and hand it to you with the keys. When I borrow money to buy a car, that's between me and the bank, also not the DMV. Those are the real epitomes, epitomes of decentralization. "Some look at was is and say 'NIH' (or an equivalent bureaucracy, the DMV). Others look at what could be and 'tap yes to complete transfer'." -- Not Quite JFK
- yashg 2y ago
  Not sure how it works in the US, but in India when sell a car, we have to get the registration transferred to the new owner. Till the new owner doesn't get the car transferred to their name, the old owner is legally responsible for anything that happens due to the car. Also when we borrow money to buy the car, the hypothecation is recorded on car's registration certificate and ownership records. When the loan is repaid, we have to get it removed by submitting closure documents to authorities. So like a property transaction, change of title also needs to be recorded in official records.

daft_pink 2y ago

Have they considered that this might increase fraud and not decrease fraud? Having your vehicle title digitally stored in a blockchain wallet on your phone seems like an invitation to fraud and scammers compared to the current vehicle title experience, where most title’s are held directly and managed by creditors, ie Bank’s with high credit ratings and extensive audits and high internal control procedures. My interpretation is that a blockchain based title system is better for the state to collect sales taxes as the title chain is more auditable and obvious, but that this will offer little to no benefit to the consumer.

arcticbull 2y ago
Not your keys, not your car. I too yearn for a return to bearer instruments outside of the train robberies of Red Dead.
throwthrowuknow 2y ago
I’d assume they are centrally managing all changes made to the blockchain, basically just using it as a database, so they should be able to implement whatever security measures they want before a transaction is approved.
m463 2y ago
I wonder about fraud too. What does the "claim your title" process mean? I'm sure 99% of people will not "claim" their title. Can you just walk up to a car, take a snapshot of the VIN on the windshield and the license plate and claim someone's title? If you need the name, lots of people have that information available on or in their car. (also if blockchain uses lots of energy will this make vehicles even more carbon negative?)

mindcandy 2y ago

As a drooling crypto bro, a single organization creating a blockchain by itself for itself doesn't actually accomplish anything. Blockchains enable decentralized trust. And, there's nothing decentralized if a single org controls everything on the chain. Corporate/Government attribution chains can make sense. But, only for rare circumstances because the primary requirement is relinquishment of control on the part of the Corpo or Govt. Truly rare indeed... So, if a group of organizations want to make attestments, and if they all want to be able to recognize those attestments, but they do not want any one of them to be in control of the records, then it can make sense. So, the articles example of digital car titles could possibly make sense if multiple states get on board. And, maaaaybe it would make sense for car dealerships to be able to participate directly. Preferably with some sort of on-chain collateral as a fraud deterrent. But, even this would need to be fleshed out a lot before I'd get excited about it.

thrill 2y ago
Getting multiple states onboard requires at least one state to begin the process.

wantsanagent 2y ago

I look forward to the day when losing my phone also means losing provable ownership of my car!

yashg 2y ago

Such articles shilling blockchain had disappeared for some time. It seems they are back. Yet another in a series of good old IT project that doesn't actually need "blockchain" but uses the term to make headlines. Here in India I use an app provided by RTO (India's equivalent of DMV) where I can see my car's registration details, insurance, PUC (Pollution Certificate) and even my driving licenses details. There's another app that shows my traffic rules violation tickets and I can even pay the fines online if there are any. None of it requires "blockchain". This project is most probably using the good old SQL database at the backend to store actual data and there's an app front end. Even if uses a blockchain - it's a private blockchain and offers zero benefits over a regular database.

deleted 2y ago

[deleted]