#dusk $DUSK Just dipped into Dusk’s Discord a moment ago and saw someone ask, “What’s the difference between programmable privacy and anonymous coins?” The thread turned into an argument spanning over a dozen pages. I stared at the chat logs for a while and realized most people treat “privacy” and “anonymity” as the same thing—this misunderstanding is more common than you’d think.$SNDKB
The logic of anonymous coins is: “No one will ever know who I am, or how much I’ve transferred.” But Dusk’s “programmable privacy” takes a completely different route—not to make everyone unable to see everything, but to let the right people see, and prevent the wrong people from seeing. These two sentences sound similar, but the underlying logic differs by one dimension.
In traditional finance, your stock holdings are known to the exchange, the clearing institution, and regulators can pull them up—while your coworker at the next table doesn’t know, and strangers on social media don’t know. That’s “graded visibility.” If the blockchain were to be fully transparent across the board, it’s like knocking down the walls of graded visibility. This is unacceptable for institutions—no hedge fund would broadcast its positions to the entire world in real time.$SPCXB
Dusk uses zero-knowledge proofs so transaction validity can be verified without exposing details, while also giving regulators a “compliance key”—not a backdoor, but a mechanism chosen by the issuer or the user to disclose to specific parties. Under the EU’s DLT pilot framework, this approach may be more persuasive than on-chain “pretend-to-be-compliant” transparency schemes. But to be honest, whether this mechanism can pass regulators in different countries is another question—standards vary by jurisdiction, and adapting one protocol to all requirements at once may be underestimated.
I’ve left a little in the base position; the main action can wait until the first issuance case that officially passes regulatory approval.
What do you think: is “selective disclosure” the way forward for private blockchain networks, or will compliance teams basically never buy it? Discuss in the comments.#dusk @Dusk
The logic of anonymous coins is: “No one will ever know who I am, or how much I’ve transferred.” But Dusk’s “programmable privacy” takes a completely different route—not to make everyone unable to see everything, but to let the right people see, and prevent the wrong people from seeing. These two sentences sound similar, but the underlying logic differs by one dimension.
In traditional finance, your stock holdings are known to the exchange, the clearing institution, and regulators can pull them up—while your coworker at the next table doesn’t know, and strangers on social media don’t know. That’s “graded visibility.” If the blockchain were to be fully transparent across the board, it’s like knocking down the walls of graded visibility. This is unacceptable for institutions—no hedge fund would broadcast its positions to the entire world in real time.$SPCXB
Dusk uses zero-knowledge proofs so transaction validity can be verified without exposing details, while also giving regulators a “compliance key”—not a backdoor, but a mechanism chosen by the issuer or the user to disclose to specific parties. Under the EU’s DLT pilot framework, this approach may be more persuasive than on-chain “pretend-to-be-compliant” transparency schemes. But to be honest, whether this mechanism can pass regulators in different countries is another question—standards vary by jurisdiction, and adapting one protocol to all requirements at once may be underestimated.
I’ve left a little in the base position; the main action can wait until the first issuance case that officially passes regulatory approval.
What do you think: is “selective disclosure” the way forward for private blockchain networks, or will compliance teams basically never buy it? Discuss in the comments.#dusk @Dusk
合规就得全透明别搞折中
0%
分级可见才是金融的本貌
100%
监管不会认这种隐私方案
0%
1 votes • Voting closed