@Dusk
i went back to read how dusk's citadel actually works instead of just repeating the "privacy plus selective disclosure" pitch, and something doesn't line up. citadel describes the user as fully in charge of their data — they choose what to share, with whom, and can even withdraw access to it later. that's still the current framing too — actually i went in expecting this to be some shelved 2023 idea, but it's sitting right there in dusk's post-mainnet roadmap as the live zk-kyc/aml piece.
but regulators generally don't want optional access. audit and reporting requirements usually mean mandatory, revocable-by-no-one visibility, not something a user consents to once and can pull back later. if citadel gives users the power to withdraw disclosure, i'm not sure how that squares with the "regulator can see what they need" framing dusk uses elsewhere — unless there's a separate compliance layer sitting underneath that i just haven't found yet.
worth saying: user-controlled data is a genuinely strong privacy feature for dusk, i'm not knocking that part. i just don't think "user-revocable" and "regulator-guaranteed" can both be true of the same disclosure at the same time.
anyone seen documentation on what happens if a dusk user withdraws access after a regulator already requested it? 🧐
#dusk $DUSK