Exchange private (encrypted) data between accounts

How can I exchange encrypted data between accounts? I want to invite known accounts to share data with me. Signing contracts, …
The rest api does not offer any functions.

1 Like

It is not build yet.

The problem here is that you share to your friends with your data, but it won’t stop your friends to share to other friends, and thereby rendering private data useless. There might be a way, similar to proxy. A throwaway one time link to your friend.


You’ll need to look at the low level API until helper libraries are built on top of it to simplify this. I don’t know myself yet how these kinds of things work, but believe they are catered for in the core libraries, and possibly the FFI. Some of this will soon appear within v0.6 of the Launcher API (current version is 0.5), but you could already access these features directly if you link directly with the core rather than going via Launcher.

My suggestion is to wait for the Launcher update that implements v0.6 API and try that. You can already look at what is coming in the list of active RFCs on github.

For low level API see RFC no 41 and v0.6 Laucher API see RFC no 42.

1 Like

Thank you all.

@anon81773980: I want to send contracts (rfq: request for quotation ) to suppliers. My rfq document should not be readable by other users in the safenet. Only invited users should be able to access the douments. If they send it to someone else they violate the terms of contract. I could send a rfq per mail to my suppliers. The postman should not be able to read it, but my suppliers.

That is how private data will work. You can send the datamap of the file to the supplier and then they can access the file. No one else has access to the file


Thank you. Good information.

1 Like

But I have to wait for the Launcher update?

I gather that that the datamap is not given to you or “transferable” yet. But the plan is for this to be possible and easy to do. In essence it is the “copy file” equivalent we have now in OSes

This sounds very interesting for me. But I am still in the evaluation state. My concept is to develop a html javascript application that accesses the safenet (via the safe launcher) via the REST-api.
The application runs in the user’s browser. In addition, the application has access to our server. The goal, however, is to handle as many processes as possible and the data exchange via safenet. We operate a large platform for service tenders. Our customers are, for example, BASF, RWE, etc


@neo, but the datamap can be assigned a single owner, is this right? so you wouldn’t be able to assign a group of people (suppliers in the case of @ralfnap) as owners, you would need to make a copy for each supplier.

The datamap is just data. You could copy it to a SD(s) or immutable chunk(s) and send that as mail if you wanted.

Will the owner of private data be able to share data table, but have the ability to remove access to previously shared users?

If you share a datamap of immutable chunks then no. The chunks remain (unless deletion of chunks is implemented)

But if you store the file in a SD then you can rewrite the SD with new encrypted data then its gobbledegook to the others.

No, in any case, access to the file cannot be removed from the receivers of the datamap:

  • If the file is large (>= 3072 bytes) then it is split is in chunks which are stored as immutable data that cannot be deleted.

  • If the file is smaller then the datamap is the file, so transmitting the datamap means that the receivers have a copy of the file itself. You can rewrite your own copy but this this won’t impact theirs.

For Immutable storage of the file you are correct

BUT my alternative to storing the file in immutable storage was to store the file in a SD instead (which you quoted). And I would think if you store the actual file in an SD then you have every ability to wipe the contents of the SD which is removing the contents of the file.

The problem as always is that the receivers have taken a copy of the file.

1 Like

Which is no problem in my case.

This will be tricky for me since I want to build a electronic medical record that is controlled by the patient, which includes giving and removing access privileges to their information.

If I understand correctly, you’ll be able to remove access, it’s just you won’t be able to make them unsee what they already saw. I believe that is not a problem with the technology though.

Isn’t this just a feature of the universe we live in? … You can’t stop the signal.

1 Like

To add to what @Tim87 said, the attending medical professional may also keep their own records on you. They may do this for professional reasons, or for liability reasons.

I agree as a medical professional myself, I should have permanent access to the documents I create and I guess it would be fine for me to have permanent access to the documents the patient already provided. Then maybe it would be access to new data added to the patient’s chart after they hypothetically are not my patient anymore and are not documents I created.