Of course the need and use of multisig addresses are paramount, however I am somewhat perplex why it seem like a multisig address cannot be "usefully" be created using two (2) wallet addresses from a single node. Here is the reason for my (seemingly outrageous) statement...
Creating and using a mutisig from two (2) wallet addresses and two (2) different nodes works perfectly as each wallet's pubkey is stored separatly in their respective nodes, resulting in a transaction sent from the multisig requires obtaining the signatures from both walllets before the transaction is "complete" and can be broadcast to the blockchain. The process flow for a 2-of-N multisig can be viewed as: create -> incomplete -> sign -> complete -> send.
However, if a multisig address is created from two (2) wallets on the same node, creating a transaction using this multisig...surprisingly (at a first glance)...the transaction is immediately considered "complete"...eh? In comparison, the process flow is: create -> complete -> send.
I fully understand why technically this is correct (both wallet's pubkey are held in the node). However, this "behaviour" or outcome seems to render the use of multisig "not useful" i.e. it seems contrary to the intended (and expected) use of multisig.
As a cautionary note: be very careful if you use importprivkey and import a multisig's signatory wallet into the same node of another signatory wallet...a case of the "unintended consequences" will bemoan you.
I am relative new to this exciting world of blockchain...so....am I missing something? I await your response.