A blockchain can prove that you made a transaction.
A financial market also needs to know whether you were allowed to make it.
That's something I kept thinking about while looking deeper into RWAs.
If I swap ETH for USDC, the network mainly needs to verify that the transaction is valid.
But buying a regulated security is different.
Am I verified?
Am I eligible to buy it?
Can I transfer it to someone else?
And what happens if a regulator needs to review the transaction?
This is where @Dusk_Foundation starts getting interesting to me.
Dusk isn't treating identity and compliance as something that has to happen completely outside the blockchain.
Its Citadel layer is designed around credentials and selective disclosure, so an application can verify what's necessary without exposing everyone's information to the entire network.
And I think that's a much harder problem than simply putting an asset onchain.
Because financial markets don't just need to know what happened.
They need to know who was allowed to make it happen.
That's the part of the RWA narrative I think gets overlooked.
Tokenizing the asset is one thing.
Making the rules around that asset enforceable onchain is another.
That's the part of Dusk I'm watching next.
$DUSK #dusk
What matters most when bringing regulated assets onchain?