This might be a silly question. But since more and more people simply use public blockchains as a secure ledger to store mutually agreed information to secure their high level applications, could we abstract blockchains as a secure ledger primitive that has the following properties:
- Tamper-proof (by minority of the participants)
- Universally consistent view (under certain synchrony assumptions),
of course which applies to secure permissionless blockchains only. My question is, what prevents an abstracted secure blockchain to be defined/considered a cryptographic primitive? Does it need a paper or standard document that presents a formal definition and a security proof, or are there some deeper rules basically says primitives can only be very low level fundamental constructions?
This comes from reading recent advancements of transparency logs and makes me realize the border between blockchain and secure public transparency logs (such as a distributedly maintained append-only merkle tree) are getting blurred.
Edit Nov. 2023: As @Paul suggests, this is a useful discussion -> What's a cryptographic primitive, really?