I'm currently taking part in IBM hackathon based on a healthcare theme and my project idea is that storing patient healthcare reports or medical research docs on the blockchain, is this idea had some potential to make a difference in the hackathon?

Is the idea of a blockchain is that records are publicly verifiable? By anyone? Does sound like personal records are a good use case.
A distributed ledger on the other hand....

@dan-pud I don't know I'm new to blockchain this is the random idea that came out of my mind to protect the confidentially medical record for potential cyber-attacks with the help of blockchain?

@priyanshu-zeon That only works in the sense that since it's already public, it can't be leaked anymore ¯\_ (ツ) _/¯
I'd suggest you focus on research docs, but then the question is: If anyone can publish, there will be lots of garbage. If someone needs to decide what will be published it's just a journal with a different format - but you could argue that you can use technology to make sure the docs are not modified retroactively.

@ostream no problem, I also had the doubt about this idea.

Please please please never ever ever store confidential data on a blockchain. Especially if you don't know what a blockchain is or how it works.

Hahah. Maybe an app where you can store phone numbers, passwords and bank account numbers on blockchain. XD

@ostream have you ever heard of "using the right tool for the job"? There is no scenario in which it would make sense to store private medical data on a public blockchain, full stop. Doesn't matter how many layers of encryption you're using, it's just plain wrong.

@ostream The solution is hiring people who know how to secure a traditional database. Putting data on a blockchain means that if those same people screw up the encryption, the data will be forever breached AND available to everyone. There is no technical justification for using a blockchain to store private medical data, end of story. If you think otherwise, then you don't fully understand what a blockchain is or does.

Basically, block chain tech as currently used isn't great for data storage. There are new things coming, but it's iffy.

However, the root of your idea is solid. There have been attempts at decentralised social networks, where you've got your own data stored securely, you control who has access, you can take it with you and you keep ownership.

The problem with this model is... Doctors probably need more access than you do. And if the server where you're storing your data is offline, you can't access it.

There's some potential. You end up with something like an "eventually consistent" database, but owned by you. You'd still want your data backed up with your GP (losing your entire medical records=bad), and there'd need to be a way for emergency services to access it quickly. The benefit of "blockchain" is that everyone can see the transfer, if you don't have the encryption keys you can't do anything/read anything stored securely. But the concept of "owning your data and controlling who has access", one of the sentiments behind blockchain, is also true of your medical info.

I'm not an expert, but my house mate is a crypto journalist, so kinda end up picking a few things up.