Recently, major firm CLS announced that it was nearing completion in the testing of a blockchain-based payment framework meant to serve financial institutions. However, even though the system is prepped for taking the stage as soon as this month, the participants behind the project have fallen drastically since the initial announcement.
This move indicates that major financial groups are not quite content with blockchain-based systems taking control of their data and services.
Coin Telegraph reports that CLS has been experimenting with the idea of larger blockchain projects for a few years now. It started looking into this ledger technology in 2015, when the innovation was in its younger stages and the possibility of mass appropriation scarcely existed. In September 2016, the early CLS blockchain tests were put under CLSNet, a system that basically assumed the part of a sandbox for DLT-controlled endeavors, helping to streamline CLS’s inside procedures at the time. Created with the aid of tech major IBM, this project aimed to guarantee liquidity and minimize the risks coming along with these financial systems.
A considerable lot of the CLS-enrolled financial groups are reluctant to consolidate blockchain into their systems as of now. This was reportedly revealed by Alan Marquard, an advancement officer at CLS. Banks have shared concerns with respect to the utilization of the this untested and ‘untrustworthy’ technology. Some of the financial firms’ concerns were drawn to safety concerns and the youth of this technology as essential reasons.
Despite the fact that that the framework is almost ready for launch, a good portion of the fourteen banks that initially agreed to participate in the CLSNet have dropped out of the program.
CLS was established in 2002 and has been quickly developing since. By 2017, it was dealing with more than half of all forex exchanges around the world. CLS’s clients incorporate more than 60 of the world’s biggest financial foundations including JPMorgan Chase, Barclays, Goldman Sachs, and Citigroup.[The views and opinions expressed in this article are those of the authors and do not necessarily reflect the views and/or the official policy of the website. ]