Ledger, sync, offline and hardware requirements · C0926
How many people would have to agree before a sensitive ledger action goes ahead?
Designed, not yet built
Short answer
The federated ledger, spheres, tokens, wallets, bridges part of the specification (REQ-3005) says sensitive ledger actions must require multi-key corroboration by a role-diverse policy; the numeric threshold is (still an open decision) (the design example is 2-of-{clinical lead, privacy officer, security officer}). No. The specification describes it, but the pilot does not include it. Acceptance check: the policy engine refuses execution with fewer/incorrect signers; the threshold value is a config parameter, not code. Parts of it are explicitly marked as open in the specification.
This is designed, not built.
- Specification item
- REQ-3005
- Specification priority
- P0 (of P0 to P3)
- Tiers
- Small, Medium, Large
Status as of September 30, 2026. Version 0.2.0, synthetic data only. See what's built today. Not legal, medical or security advice.
Related answers
- Does AuroraMed support mintable wallets of classes W-P, W-D, W-S, W-N, W-B, W-G with minting by quorum, identity binding, expiry and rate limits? Designed
- How would two spheres be connected through a bridge? Designed
- Would typing rhythm or location be used to judge a session's risk? Designed
- Does AuroraMed implement the token types ID, ROLE, CONS, GRANT, XFER, BRG-A/BRG-B, NODE, ALERT, BG and DELEG with the semantics in design 11.5, all non-transferable except through protocol operations. [Recommended: types from design 11.5; owner must confirm the final list]? Designed
See it in context: Federated ledger, spheres, tokens, wallets, bridges · Search the help center · Ask a question