2026-01-08 16:29:54

The story of privacy coins is not just about anonymous payments. Dusk has taken a different path — from day one, its goal has not been simple anonymous transfers, but to build a privacy infrastructure for compliant finance.

This sounds quite contradictory, right? Protecting privacy on one hand, while also undergoing compliance scrutiny on the other. Dusk's solution is "programmable privacy" — transactions are encrypted by default (implemented with zero-knowledge proofs and the Phoenix transaction model), but the system secretly includes compliance channels. Authorized regulatory agencies can audit transaction details with a specific key, without needing to reveal the entire ledger.

This is why, when RWA (Real World Assets) are on-chain, institutions consider using Dusk. The $DUSK token here is not just a consumable; it supports the operation of this new financial infrastructure. The balance between privacy and compliance — this is what future finance will look like.

DUSK3,7%

View Original

This page may contain third-party content, which is provided for information purposes only (not representations/warranties) and should not be considered as an endorsement of its views by Gate, nor as financial or professional advice. See Disclaimer for details.

24 Likes

Reward
24
9
Repost
Share

Comment

0/400

APY追逐者

· 01-11 14:52

This approach is quite interesting; wanting privacy while passing audits feels like Dusk is walking a tightrope. There might still be ways to bypass the compliant channels... RWA working with Dusk definitely has some potential; institutions will truly get on board. To put it simply, privacy can't be a paradise; it also needs to reassure regulatory authorities. I've never seen a design logic like $DUSK$ before, it's not just a simple privacy narrative. Wait, zero-knowledge proofs combined with compliance keys—how stable is this architecture?

View OriginalReply0

WhaleSurfer

· 01-11 00:40

Haha, this idea is indeed interesting. But can it really be trusted? --- Compliance and privacy stuff sound like walking a tightrope. Who knows when it might go wrong? --- Does RWA implementation rely on this kind of solution? It still seems to depend on how regulators play it. --- Programmable privacy sounds powerful. But how effective it actually is remains to be seen. --- So, is Dusk just the "good kid" among privacy coins? This approach is definitely favored by certain institutions. --- Zero-knowledge proofs combined with compliant channels—no one has tried this idea yet. --- Future finance? Let me see if we can survive the next bear market first. --- It feels like they're just finding reasons to justify the privacy and compliance balance at the Exchange, speaking pretty nicely.

View OriginalReply0

ruggedNotShrugged

· 01-08 16:56

Privacy + Compliance? Sounds like you need to handle both, which is a bit challenging. --- The idea of programmable privacy is good, but actually implementing it might be another story. --- So basically, it's still leaving a backdoor for regulators. How much meaning is left in privacy then? --- Dusk's approach is interesting. It's definitely better than some coins that only talk about privacy but can't do anything. --- Using privacy infrastructure on RWA chains? If that really works, it would indeed change the game. --- Zero-knowledge proofs + compliance audits—this combo is worth studying. --- That's good, protecting privacy while preventing regulators from being clueless—that's a practical approach. --- Sounds good, but in the end, institutions can still do audits whenever they want. Privacy is just a facade.

View OriginalReply0

FUDwatcher

· 01-08 16:53

This approach is indeed innovative; it's hard to imagine privacy and compliance being integrated together. Does the regulatory authority have key audits? It still feels like a significant backdoor. Is this kind of thing necessary for RWA on-chain? Will institutions really pay for it? Dusk's logic has a bit of a "too good to be true" vibe. Once the compliance channel is open, what's the point of hiding privacy? Zero-knowledge proofs + regulatory channels, aiming to kill two birds with one stone. How is the value of this token supported? Is it just a traffic story?

View OriginalReply0

SignatureVerifier

· 01-08 16:52

so they're basically saying "trust us, regulators have a backdoor but like... a *nice* one" lmao. zero-knowledge proof implementation still requires auditing before i even consider the compliance angle tbh. phoenix model keeps getting cited but insufficient validation on actual threat modeling. backdoor access for "authorized" entities is the oldest play in the book ngl

Reply0

FlashLoanKing

· 01-08 16:51

The theory of programmable privacy sounds good, but I wonder if the regulatory authorities' keys will be abused when it is actually implemented... --- Wait, privacy coins still need to leave a backdoor for regulators? Isn't that just wanting to have it both ways? --- RWA on-chain indeed requires this kind of design, but I still think dusk's approach is a bit too compromising. --- Compliance channels sound secure, but who can guarantee that specific keys won't be hacked? --- Finally, privacy coins are considering cooperation with institutions, although it feels like a somewhat grudging compromise. --- $dusk's positioning is quite clear, not taking the hardline approach like Monero. --- Zero-knowledge proofs combined with audit keys? This combo really needs some careful thought. --- Why would institutions choose dusk instead of directly using CDC or something similar... Is the difference really that big? --- Can privacy and compliance truly coexist? It always feels like a false proposition.

View OriginalReply0

NoStopLossNut

· 01-08 16:44

This is the real track, where privacy and compliance can coexist. No wonder institutions are paying attention. --- The programmable privacy approach is indeed excellent. It needs privacy and approval at the same time. Dusk is already thinking ahead while others are still dreaming. --- RWA on-chain will eventually require this kind of solution. There's no other way; otherwise, financial institutions simply can't get involved. --- Basically, it's like giving big institutions an insurance policy. Privacy is real, but regulatory authorities can still see it—perfect. --- The zero-knowledge approach finally has a serious use case, unlike some coins that hype loudly but are never actually used. --- $DUSK's positioning is quite interesting. It's not just riding the privacy hype; it's genuinely building infrastructure.

View OriginalReply0

HodlTheDoor

· 01-08 16:32

Really, this is the right path. Combining compliance and privacy on both fronts, not the old-fashioned all-or-nothing logic. Privacy coin proponents are still arguing over who is more anonymous, while Dusk is already building the infrastructure for future finance. The scale is vastly different. After RWA (Real-World Assets) integration, what traditional institutions need are things that can protect privacy and pass audits—smart choices. The technology behind zero-knowledge proofs is indeed excellent, and the idea of programmable privacy is truly innovative—no one has thought of it before. Wait, if this is the case, do regulatory authorities having a key still pose a backdoor risk? Or has this design been thoroughly considered? $DUSK's potential for success lies right here. The actual demand for the token is clear, unlike some coins that are purely speculative. Honestly, I used to have a poor impression of privacy coins, but Dusk's approach has made me rethink.

View OriginalReply0

FastLeaver

· 01-08 16:30

Oh wow, this idea is brilliant. Can privacy and compliance really coexist? --- Programmable privacy sounds advanced, but it still feels like doing regulatory business? --- Gotta say, Dusk's logic is quite interesting. The pain point of RWA on-chain is solved in one go. --- Honestly, creating zero-knowledge proofs is already impressive, but I still have some concerns about private key auditing. --- Wanting both privacy and compliance? That's like having your cake and eating it too. Dusk really dares to think. --- I'm optimistic about this direction. It's much better than those purely anonymous coins being delisted by exchanges. --- Is the value of $DUSK mainly betting on this infrastructure? It depends on whether it can truly be implemented. --- Institutions need this kind of thing. Privacy + compliance is the right way. --- Feels like creating a backdoor for regulators? 😂 But maybe this way is actually easier to accept. --- How does the Phoenix model work? Curious if the underlying system can truly prevent abuse of power.

View OriginalReply0