Blockchain-based privacy-preserving SaaS acquisition through NFTs and Ricardian contracts


Abstract

Current Software-as-a-Service (SaaS) platforms require users to disclose personal information during service registration, which implies privacy risks and regulatory compliance challenges, particularly in privacy-sensitive domains such as healthcare, financial analytics, research computing, and decentralized knowledge platforms. This paper presents a proof-of-concept blockchain-based framework enabling anonymous service acquisition through non-fungible tokens (NFTs) linked to legally-interpretable Ricardian contracts. The system combines smart contracts for token management, InterPlanetary File System (IPFS) for decentralized contract storage, and pseudonymous wallet addresses to decouple user identity from service acquisition. Users acquire services by obtaining NFTs that serve as both digital receipts and proofs, with each token cryptographically linked to a personalized Ricardian contract stored on IPFS. The framework addresses a significant gap in privacy-preserving service acquisition for domains where anonymity is both feasible and essential, providing a scalable alternative to traditional identity-based registration systems without compromising contractual transparency or verifiability. Performance evaluation shows Ricardian contracts upload times of 350-750ms and retrieval times under 35ms across different contract sizes. Economic analysis demonstrates feasibility with individual service acquisition costs of approximately \$3.50, while batch processing reduces costs up to 86\% through deployment cost amortization. Privacy analysis confirms that no personally identifiable information is stored on-chain, with contractual relationships recorded only through pseudonymous wallet addresses, achieving compliance with data minimization principles while enabling legal enforceability.
Ask to review this manuscript

Notes for potential reviewers

  • Volunteering is not a guarantee that you will be asked to review. There are many reasons: reviewers must be qualified, there should be no conflicts of interest, a minimum of two reviewers have already accepted an invitation, etc.
  • This is NOT OPEN peer review. The review is single-blind, and all recommendations are sent privately to the Academic Editor handling the manuscript. All reviews are published and reviewers can choose to sign their reviews.
  • What happens after volunteering? It may be a few days before you receive an invitation to review with further instructions. You will need to accept the invitation to then become an official referee for the manuscript. If you do not receive an invitation it is for one of many possible reasons as noted above.

  • PeerJ Computer Science does not judge submissions based on subjective measures such as novelty, impact or degree of advance. Effectively, reviewers are asked to comment on whether or not the submission is scientifically and technically sound and therefore deserves to join the scientific literature. Our Peer Review criteria can be found on the "Editorial Criteria" page - reviewers are specifically asked to comment on 3 broad areas: "Basic Reporting", "Experimental Design" and "Validity of the Findings".
  • Reviewers are expected to comment in a timely, professional, and constructive manner.
  • Until the article is published, reviewers must regard all information relating to the submission as strictly confidential.
  • When submitting a review, reviewers are given the option to "sign" their review (i.e. to associate their name with their comments). Otherwise, all review comments remain anonymous.
  • All reviews of published articles are published. This includes manuscript files, peer review comments, author rebuttals and revised materials.
  • Each time a decision is made by the Academic Editor, each reviewer will receive a copy of the Decision Letter (which will include the comments of all reviewers).

If you have any questions about submitting your review, please email us at [email protected].