The law does not follow the dramatic development of new technologies, including the distributed ledger technology (hereinafter: DLT), often called blockchain (hereinafter: BC). There are numerous examples of the application of these technologies in a company. An underregulated environment emphasizes the need of an ethical approach in situations where a company decides to select a new BC tool, as well as to identify a relevant body in the company that will ensure the selection and implementation BC technological solutions in an ethical and impartial manner. The development of an ethical framework for BC solutions is not only needed as a substitute for the missing legal regulation, but should also be an independent regulatory effort. To this end, technology scandals are being investigated in which significant deviations from the fundamental promises of BC technology have occurred during hacker attacks. It was examined whether the same system recovery procedures were applied in factually similar situations. It was found that recovery procedures were substantially diverging, which raises strong ethical concerns. Therefore, regulatory initiatives calling for ethical BC technology are explored. In the last part of the paper, the author proposes two alternatives as an answer to the question who should be in charge in the company to ensure that BC technology solutions are selected and applied in an ethical and impartial manner. Although companies are free to set up their “ethical and prevention of conflict of interest system” autonomously, they might consider to select a technology committee for that role or a compliance officer. Either way, companies should decide whether to design ethical and conflict of interest control as ex ante or ex post, given the importance of the corporate function or operation that is going to be digitalized by applying BC technology solutions.