# Comparing Blockchain Standards and Recommendations
## 6 Results  
While we were able to find a large number of publications on blockchains and the distributed ledger done by standardization authorities already, all of them are merely informative. Of course, this provides a good overview and starting point for implementing this technology, but the severe lack of normative reference material could hinder the adoption of Blockchains/DLT as organizations could decide to wait for standards to cling to. That said, especially the works of the German Institute for Standardization provided more than just a report on the technology or its aspects. Namely, clear outlines and implementation guidelines for specific use cases of blockchain applications. For actors in the financial or banking sector, the document by ENISA will prove itself useful, as the provided best practices are tailored to overcome existing cybersecurity and legal problems of that sector.  
While it can be observed that there is a progress in the quality and substantiality of blockchain standards development over the years, we have yet to see an actual normative standard that can be used for a compliant implementation of blockchains and auditing thereof, similar to the ISO 27,001 for information security. Most of the standardization efforts so far are focused on the technology itself. For future developments, specialized standardization for the various economic sectors and industries can be beneficial since compliance requirements differ from one industry to another.  
Additionally, both [7; 40] state the importance of demystifying blockchains and distributed ledgers and that there are still many misunderstandings and misconceptions about the technology. They are often seen as a synonym for cryptocurrency or Bitcoin. Decoupling this line of thought and having  
\begin{table}
\begin{tabular}{c c c c c} \hline \hline
**Standard** & **Terminology Ref.** & **Technical Ref.** & **Legal Ref.** & **Standard Ref.** \\ \hline NISTIR 8022 & \(\cdots\) & NIST FIPS 1804, 1864, 4202 & \(\cdots\) & NIST Cybersecurity Framework \\ \hline ASC 39 [19] & \(\cdots\) & ISO 1349J, NIST SP 800-57; & & ISO 2022, NIST SP 800-162; \\  & & NIST FIPS 140, 180, 186, 186 & \(\cdots\) & ANSI/LNTS 359 \\ \hline \multirow{2}{*}{ISO/TR 24655.2019} & ISO/IDE 14765, 1888; ISO/TR & \(\cdots\) & \(\cdots\) & ISO 639, 3166, 4127, 8601 \\  & 28122 & & & \(\cdots\) & \(\cdots\) \\ \hline \multirow{2}{*}{DN SPEC 16997} & ISO 2798; ISO/IDE 2002, 4998, & & & \\  & 8211, 2832; IEC/TR 62541, 62210 & \(\cdots\) & \(\cdots\) & \(\cdots\) \\ \hline \multirow{2}{*}{DN SPEC 3103} & DNN SPEC 16697 & \(\cdots\) & \(\cdots\) & \(\cdots\) & \(\cdots\) \\  & & ISO/ICE 5976, 10118, 14888; & & & \\  & & ETS IN 319 132-1; ETS ITS 119 & TR-3011, NITIS FF 1804, & \(\cdots\) & ISO/ICE 2700, 27003, \\  & & 142-3; IEC 6499-1; & 186-4; PRC 4427; PCS & \(\cdots\) & 27004, 27005 \\  & & SOC-45 [FOOTNOTE:5]Footnote 5: [[https://github.com/ibid](https://github.com/ibid)]([https://github.com/ibid](https://github.com/ibid))  
clear a clear definition and understanding of what the technology actually is and what it can do serves as a basis for further standardization efforts. Therefore, the pace of distributed ledger standardization is directly linked to the understanding of the actual abilities and possibilities of the technology. As long as the majority just see Blockchains as a toy for generating digital wealth, the success of the technology is vastly limited in scale and functionality.  
One important factor, especially in the field of information security management is that there is a severe lack of legal references and references to certain standards of the ISO 27k series. Without a clear path on how compliance and especially integration of blockchains into existing information security management systems can be done, it could result in negligence of the technology due to potentially high risks.