Proof-of-work and proof-of-stake only work because the total pool is huge; much bigger than any one party can muster. But those guarantees don’t exist for a single private organization, or a small dark pool. Without those proofs, a blockchain is just a crappy, inefficient ledger.
I’m sure plenty of companies are “working” on the problem, but I have less confidence they aren’t just attaching a buzzword to some completely normal ledger system.
Some companies are huge. I agree this would only make sense in really, really big companies.
That just means the pool of machines available to an insider for a 51% attack is larger.
I guess you could regularly snapshot the internal blockchain, encrypt it, publish it, and put the hash on a public blockchain. That would reduce the time an insider has to pull off a successful attack.
The question is does this make it harder for the person to embezzle the current way or to control a blockchain? I don’t know. I am sure the companies working on this think about that.
I work (obliquely) in finance and I can say these companies are all allergic to public blockchains. No way in hell are they letting their data out into the world to be held on millions of other people’s/company’s computers.
They will do it all internally or not at all.