Private BitAssets open to manipulation?

[bytemaster]

I believe that private bitassets are subject to this kind of thing, depending on the rules of the asset.

For example, Bytemaster could create billions of Brownies and dump them on all buy orders. 


Private bitassets are private and you must trust the issuer.  If you dont, dont buy them.

If a private bitasset issuer does not have authority to "force a black swan" then the market participants are protected against feed manipulation.  If the feed goes to 0 the ORDER BOOK would not change and no one would be forced out of their position.   

Our intent is to make the feed almost irrelevant so you have the MINIMAL possible trust in the issuer.   

I would double check the logic on creating new margin positions to make sure that a low feed doesn't allow unlimited printing of the asset.

[Ander]

I believe that private bitassets are subject to this kind of thing, depending on the rules of the asset.

For example, Bytemaster could create billions of Brownies and dump them on all buy orders. 


Private bitassets are private and you must trust the issuer.  If you dont, dont buy them.

[Akado]

Dynamic account permissions and/or multisig could solve this? I mean, if it's a "small" BitAsset maybe, but if something like a huge company decides to do so..
The only thing that I see can be used as insurance for extreme situations like this is a prediction market

Also, for someone to use someone's private assets, it's because it needs to be an entity you trust. Ok, nothing prevents them from doing so, but by being a well known company/person, can't those be made responsible? For their assets to be used people need to be confident enough, have enough information on the entity providing that service.

[speedy]

1) Create private BitAsset
2) Provide the price feed and wait for it to become popular
3) Go short bigtime
4) Set the price feed to zero and cover for nothing
5) Profit!

What am I missing here? Do we have only the issuer's reputation to prevent this?