Privacy and compliance—these two words have been entangled in the financial industry for too long. On one side are regulatory red lines, and on the other are institutions' demands for business secrets; neither side can retreat. But this deadlock may soon be broken.
Take cross-border payments as an example. An international bank needs to process large transfers. Traditional SWIFT takes three to five days at best, with outrageously high fees. What about on-chain solutions? Using zero-knowledge proof technology, transaction details are fully encrypted and hidden—business secrets are well protected. The key is that regulators hold specific audit keys, allowing them to penetrate the encryption when needed to identify money laundering risks. This "default privacy, post-transaction transparency" logic reduces settlement times from days to seconds, with costs three to four times cheaper.
Looking at asset management. Suppose a $1 billion real estate fund is to be tokenized on-chain and sold to global retail and institutional investors. What's the difficulty? Each person's share must clearly correspond to their rights, but investor identities and holdings need to be protected. Automated audit records must also be generated to satisfy regulatory authorities worldwide. Europe has done this with a fund, increasing liquidity by three times without leaking any client information. Two years ago, such a scenario would have been unimaginable.
The DeFi space is also undergoing change. Previously, DeFi was synonymous with "anarchism." Now, it's different. You can build "compliant lending pools": institutions can use tokenized government bonds as collateral to borrow money, with privacy-preserving negotiations on interest rates and counterparties. Meanwhile, risk control data like fund flows and collateral ratios are fully transparent to regulators through cryptography. This is no longer a wild experimental playground but a formal tool with risk management frameworks.
These cases point to one direction: future financial infrastructure must be programmable and inherently designed to protect commercial privacy. It's not about revolutionizing the old system but upgrading it—more efficient, safer, and more aligned with the needs of the times. Only when banks and funds truly start using these technologies can they be considered fully implemented.
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.
12 Likes
Reward
12
6
Repost
Share
Comment
0/400
MEVHunter
· 12h ago
zero knowledge proofs sound sick but... who's actually holding those audit keys? that's the real honeypot nobody talks about. regulatory capture incoming fr fr
Reply0
ImpermanentPhobia
· 17h ago
Zero-knowledge proofs are indeed a powerful combination. Can privacy and compliance really be perfectly integrated like this? I'm still a bit skeptical.
View OriginalReply0
AirdropHustler
· 17h ago
Zero-knowledge proofs are indeed a brilliant approach, combining privacy and compliance. This is truly a breakthrough.
View OriginalReply0
WhaleSurfer
· 17h ago
Zero-knowledge proofs are truly awesome; privacy and transparency no longer have to be mutually exclusive.
View OriginalReply0
ShibaSunglasses
· 18h ago
Zero-knowledge proofs are truly a brilliant approach, allowing regulators to be satisfied while protecting privacy—this is the real compromise.
View OriginalReply0
ProofOfNothing
· 18h ago
Zero-knowledge proofs are basically a game of "want and need and more." Regulatory authorities are satisfied, banks' wallets are also bulging, and this deal is worth it.
Privacy and compliance—these two words have been entangled in the financial industry for too long. On one side are regulatory red lines, and on the other are institutions' demands for business secrets; neither side can retreat. But this deadlock may soon be broken.
Take cross-border payments as an example. An international bank needs to process large transfers. Traditional SWIFT takes three to five days at best, with outrageously high fees. What about on-chain solutions? Using zero-knowledge proof technology, transaction details are fully encrypted and hidden—business secrets are well protected. The key is that regulators hold specific audit keys, allowing them to penetrate the encryption when needed to identify money laundering risks. This "default privacy, post-transaction transparency" logic reduces settlement times from days to seconds, with costs three to four times cheaper.
Looking at asset management. Suppose a $1 billion real estate fund is to be tokenized on-chain and sold to global retail and institutional investors. What's the difficulty? Each person's share must clearly correspond to their rights, but investor identities and holdings need to be protected. Automated audit records must also be generated to satisfy regulatory authorities worldwide. Europe has done this with a fund, increasing liquidity by three times without leaking any client information. Two years ago, such a scenario would have been unimaginable.
The DeFi space is also undergoing change. Previously, DeFi was synonymous with "anarchism." Now, it's different. You can build "compliant lending pools": institutions can use tokenized government bonds as collateral to borrow money, with privacy-preserving negotiations on interest rates and counterparties. Meanwhile, risk control data like fund flows and collateral ratios are fully transparent to regulators through cryptography. This is no longer a wild experimental playground but a formal tool with risk management frameworks.
These cases point to one direction: future financial infrastructure must be programmable and inherently designed to protect commercial privacy. It's not about revolutionizing the old system but upgrading it—more efficient, safer, and more aligned with the needs of the times. Only when banks and funds truly start using these technologies can they be considered fully implemented.