> The possibility that a Libra node run by Mastercard or Andressen Horrowitz would suddenly start running malicious code is such a bizarre scenario to plan for and is better solved by simply enforcing protocol integrity and through non-technical (i.e. legal) means.

Hmm, I'm not sure I'm convinced. While "Mastercard as an entity turns into a malicious actor" doesn't seem like an important threat model, it seems to me maybe guarding against mailicious actors within (eg) Mastercard, as well as external attacks on Mastercard is? And justifies this stuff?

The possibliity that a node run by Mastercard would suddenly start running malcicious code doesn't seem that bizarre a scenario to me, if we remember it can happen not just cause the CEO of Mastercard directs it to, but because of criminal activities from hackers as well as employees for their own gain.

Am I wrong?