Introduction In blockchain, a cross-chain bridge refers to protocols or systems facilitating interoperability between different blockchains, enabling the transfer of assets, data, or information. Initially, blockchain networks like Bitcoin, Ethereum, and others operated independently, each with various consensus mechanisms and native assets. This lack of efficient communication led to the need for alternative methods as the blockchain space expanded, and users sought seamless interaction with multiple decentralized ecosystems. A cross-chain bridge serves as an interoperability solution, allowing for the smooth exchange of assets across different blockchain networks. This opens up new opportunities for cross-chain decentralized applications (dApps), services, and use cases like decentralized finance (DeFi) applications, token swaps, cross-chain asset transfers, and more. Typically, a cross-chain bridge involves a bridge token or native asset representing the transferred value. Mechanisms like decentralized oracles, validators or guardians, and relayers are employed to verify transactions, ensuring security and consensus across participating blockchain networks. Early cross-chain solutions involved wrapped tokens and centralized exchanges acting as intermediaries. However, as the blockchain ecosystem matured, developers and industry experts recognized the impracticality of this approach, leading to the creation of more robust cross-chain solutions. How a Cross-chain Bridge Works Below is how a cross-chain bridge works: Bridging Mechanism: Utilizing smart contracts or similar mechanisms, cross-chain bridges establish a secure framework for transferring assets or data between disparate blockchain networks. Native Assets: These bridges often require a native asset or collateralized token representing the transferred value, ensuring the security and integrity of transactions during the transfer process. Validators or Guardians: Validators play a crucial role, serving as vanguards and custodians within the network, verifying transactions, and maintaining consensus across participating blockchains. They can be decentralized or operated by trusted external entities. Decentralized Oracles: Oracles provide essential data for seamless cross-chain transfers by gathering information from external blockchains or off-chain sources. Consensus Mechanisms: Cross-chain bridges employ various consensus mechanisms, such as multi-sig wallets or threshold signatures, ensuring agreement on transaction validity across different blockchains. Asset Locking and Unlocking: This process involves locking assets on the source chain and unlocking the same native tokens from a liquidity pool on the destination chain, guaranteeing secure and accountable asset transfers between blockchains. Governance and Security: Cross-chain bridges often incorporate governance mechanisms for user involvement in decision-making, coupled with rigorous security measures like audits and bug bounties. User Experience: Prioritizing a seamless user experience, cross-chain bridges offer user-friendly interfaces, transaction monitoring, and notifications to keep users informed about the progress of their transactions. The Importance of Cross-chain Bridges Interoperability Facilitation: Crypto cross-chain bridges enable interoperability, addressing challenges in utilizing different tokens across blockchains for activities like staking, lending, and holding. Evolution of Passive Income: Cross-chain bridges empower users to explore diverse on-chain passive income-generating protocols, shifting from traditional asset holding to dynamic options like staking, yield farming, and lending pools. Token Compatibility as a Barrier: Cross-chain bridges overcome the challenge of blockchain compatibility, ensuring tokens are suitable for various activities such as staking, lending, and yield farming. Enhanced Productivity through NFTs: These bridges contribute to cryptocurrency productivity by enabling the use of different tokens on a blockchain, including minting NFTs on various blockchains for collateral. Liquidity Boost for DApps: Cross-chain bridges enhance liquidity for decentralized applications (dApps), which is crucial for new dApps seeking popularity by connecting to chains with excess liquidity and increasing Total Value Locked (TVL). This flexibility allows for seamless switching between networks, providing a solution to navigate congestion or address user interface (UI) issues. Types of Cross-chain Bridges Trustless Bridges: Crypto cross-chain bridges facilitate seamless asset transfers across diverse blockchain networks, offering various functionalities. They can transfer a single asset between two chains, exemplified by wBTC enabling BTC movement from the native chain to the ETH chain. Additionally, bridges like the Rainbow Bridge handle multiple assets between two chains, such as sending ETH and ERC-20 assets to the NEAR protocol. Others, like Wormhole, connect one chain to multiple chains, allowing asset transfers from Solana to Ethereum, Fantom, Avalanche, Terra, and Polygon. Furthering interoperability, bridges like Ren Bridge support the transfer of multiple assets, like BTC, Dogecoin, and ZCash, between Ethereum, Luna, Solana, and Polygon, promoting decentralized app liquidity. Some bridges, exemplified by AnySwap DEX, consolidate asset transfers on different chains under one platform, simplifying decentralized app usage. Finally, the Cross-chain landscape includes bridges supporting NFT transfers, providing users the flexibility to mint tokens on chains with lower fees and increased liquidity. Trust Mechanism Bridges: In trust mechanism bridges or guardian-based cross-chain solutions, validators or guardians play a crucial role in facilitating transactions across different blockchain networks, thereby distributing central authority among them. The introduction of a multi-signature (multi-sig) wallet further decentralizes control within this guardian-based framework, enhancing security. In a multi-sig setup, transaction authorization requires consensus from multiple private keys held by different parties, adding an extra layer of security and mitigating risks associated with a singular point of control. Ethereum Meets Aleph Zero: The MOST Connection MOST is a guardian-based bridge proposed by Aleph Zero, facilitating users to move assets between the Ethereum and Aleph Zero networks seamlessly. In this setup, eight guardians oversee two instances for both the Testnet and Mainnet. These guardians wield control over governance keys, granting them authority for decision-making and potential modifications to the bridge's configuration. The introduction of a multi-sig wallet for governance keys (one for Aleph Zero and another for Ethereum) enhances security by requiring multiple signatures for significant changes. This includes actions like performing contract upgrades or altering the composition of the guardian committee. Such measures contribute significantly to the overall robustness and decentralization of the bridge. By offering lower transaction costs for bridging native ETH, stablecoins, and other ERC-20 tokens, MOST incentivizes users to migrate their assets from Ethereum to the Aleph Zero ecosystem. Lower fees make the transition more cost-effective for users, encouraging them to participate in Aleph Zero's network and utilize its features. This increased liquidity can enhance the overall vibrancy and functionality of Aleph Zero's ecosystem. Aleph Zero's Bridging Strategy Aleph Zero has devised a three-pronged approach to establish a comprehensive bridging infrastructure, facilitating seamless interactions between Aleph Zero and other blockchain ecosystems: MOST as an Ethereum Bridge: Introducing "MOST" as an Ethereum bridge offers users a convenient and cost-effective method to transfer assets between the Aleph Zero and Ethereum networks, streamlining cross-chain transactions. Integration with Router Protocol: Aleph Zero announced an integration with the Coinbase-backed Router Protocol in Q4 2023. This collaboration aims to provide fast, reliable, and cost-effective cross-chain swaps to the Aleph Zero network from multiple ecosystems, including Ethereum, Polygon, Binance Smart Chain, Avalanche, Fantom, Base, Arbitrum, Near, Moonbeam, and Moonriver, with support for additional chains soon. zParachain Bridge to Polkadot Ecosystem: The previously announced zParachain bridge connects Aleph Zero to the Polkadot ecosystem. This integration enables interoperability between the two blockchains, allowing assets and data to flow seamlessly between Aleph Zero and Polkadot. Conclusion Aleph Zero acknowledges the constraints posed by blockchain isolation and underscores the significance of adopting a user-centric approach. Central to this vision is empowering end users with the flexibility to seamlessly bridge between a diverse array of chains. MOST is Aleph Zero's vision of a cross-chain infrastructure that is not only fast, secure, and highly reliable but also ensures a consistently smooth and user-friendly experience. And here's a fun fact: "Most” is the word for “bridge” in many Slavic countries, namely in Polish, Czech, Slovak, Slovenian, Croatian, Serbian, and Bulgarian. References: https://alephzero.org/blog/aleph-zero-bridges-most-router/

A knock on the door Rushes to go open Sighs in relief after waiting over 40 minutes for its arrival “Finally!!! Pizza’s here” Smiles. Reaches for his pocket Tips the delivery guy Closes the door Walks back to the living room Opens the pizza box Screams “WHAT??????” What could have been the problem? Surely, he didn’t see an empty box did he? Or maybe the pizza was already half-eaten? Well, I can’t say either but maybe this article can give us a hint on what caused the scream. Over the years, there has been a growing number of global challenges in supply chain management. Supply chain management simply refers to managing the flow of products and services from the suppliers to the consumers. It involves all the steps that convert raw materials into finished goods and distribute them to final consumers. One of the main essences of supply chain management is to ensure the safe and quick delivery of products to consumers but such is usually different. Supply chain management is one of the most crucial aspects of business that affects a company's overall performance, hence, a business needs to have a functioning supply chain system. ISSUES FACING CONVENTIONAL SUPPLY CHAIN MANAGEMENT SYSTEMS Highlighted below are some of the known issues facing traditional supply chain management: Lack of transparency of supply chain actors: From the highest rank to the lowest rank in the hierarchical order of a company’s structure, there can be a lack of transparency as to the state of products which may later on lead to problems that the consumer has to face alone. Lack of proper systems to aid product traceability: Traceability is the process by which companies track the movement of products along the supply chain. As products move from suppliers to consumers, there is always the possibility that the logistics truck didn’t take its expected route and developed some issues along the way, affecting the product and the consumer might not be informed. This lack of proper traceability of products along the supply chain is caused by inefficient record-keeping and proper systems to simplify the process. Lack of proper risk assessment: Many supply chain systems lack trained personnel or systems to carry out risk assessment on products to ascertain potential risks associated with products or the possible adverse impacts that a change in the geographical location might cause on products. For instance, environmental factors should always be considered in supply chain processes. Security threats: Usually, depending on the location and the distance, there is the risk of insecurity in the shipping of goods. Time-consuming manual processes: Up until this time of technological advancements and evolution, some companies are still stuck with manual ways of carrying out industrial operations which slows down the entire supply chain process. Issue of tampering: Over the past years, there have been multiple complaints about products being tampered with on arrival to the consumers. This issue has, for a long time now, continued. Consumers’ data lack privacy: Some traditional supply chain systems require the full personal information of consumers to get the delivery right. This poses a risk to the consumers' security as it can lead to their data being misused for illegal activities. Inventory management issue: Many companies deal with the issue of incorrect inventories, for example, an item being out of stock. In a case like this, the company may get thousands of orders for a product they only have in hundreds. This ultimately leads to the company canceling orders of their customers and issuing refunds. Recall the Solana Saga's inaccurate inventory that led to the company processing more phone orders than they had in stock. This led to multiple customers’ orders being canceled to match the number of orders to the number of phones in stock. Packaging errors: Let’s not forget the human factor. Humans are not machines and are bound to grow fatigued at one point. There is always the possibility of mistakes when packaging products for shipping or delivery. Wrong delivery information: Some orders don’t get to the expected customer due to errors made when filling in the delivery information. WHAT IS A ZERO-KNOWLEDGE PROOF? Zero-knowledge implies proving the truth about a piece of information without disclosing the content of that information. Zero-knowledge tech is a cryptographic method by which one party (the prover) proves the truthfulness of a transaction or message to another party (the verifier) without revealing the content of the message. A Zero-Knowledge Proof (ZKP) is the cryptographic key that the prover sends to convince the verifier of a claim but doesn’t reveal the content of that claim. HOW CAN ZERO-KNOWLEDGE PROOFS BE EMPLOYED IN SUPPLY CHAIN MANAGEMENT Zero-knowledge proofs have massive potential in various industries like supply chain management. Here are some ways in which ZKPs can be applied and be beneficial to the supply chain sector: Protecting patent or intellectual property: Blockchain holds a permanent and immutable record of activities that happen on-chain and zero-knowledge proofs can be used to verify facts without divulging information. They can be applied in the supply chain to help protect companies’ intellectual properties or patent rights and also help prevent being charged with theft. How so? If a company utilizes blockchain tech to conduct its manufacturing business and somehow faces a legal battle of alleged patent or intellectual property theft (simply put, the company is being accused of stealing another company’s ideas for a product or process), the company can employ the use of ZKPs to proof the authenticity and originality of their product without the need to reveal its process or product’s private data to the other company or to an outside party (say the lawyer or court). Protection of users' data & identity: Zero-knowledge technology or protocols can be utilized by companies that use third parties for shipping or deliveries to protect sensitive personal information of their customers. ZKPs are useful in proving the correctness of a customer's public information but not revealing much private information about the customer to the shipping/delivery company. Also, with ZKPs, customers can prove ownership of their orders but not reveal much information to the “delivery guy” or the shipping company. Ascertaining the quality and provenance of products: Products with specific dates, origins, and events can be entered into a shared ledger by supply chain actors. With the emergence of IoT, some of these products' data like temperature, stress resistance, pressure, elastic limits, etc are made available to be transferred across various devices and can therefore be linked. However, supply chain actors don’t need to enter or reveal the entire content of the data, they can share proofs (e.g., location proofs, proof that the boiling temperature of a product doesn’t exceed the normal) of the validity of the data relating to the products. A smart contract is utilized to ensure that every supply chain participant shares valid proofs. Predetermined conditions are programmed into the smart contract so that it automatically knows and verifies the products if those conditions are met. Once verified, the quality and provenance of the products are ascertained. Real-time traceability: Participants in the supply chain can utilize ZKP to prove the location or condition of a product without having to provide the product's precise location or other specific details. This improves security and privacy when tracking products from manufacture to delivery. To verify compliance with regulations: ZKPs can be used to show compliance with certain guidelines and regulations without revealing private or sensitive information. This is especially helpful in sectors of the economy where compliance with rules is essential. In cases of collaborations between multiple companies, a more suitable solution - sMPC can be utilized in union with ZKPs. Secure Multi-Party Computation allows for multiple parties to work together on a computation to achieve a desired result without any company needing to reveal trade secrets and whatnot. Learn more about ZKPs and sMPC in this article. ZKPs have found wide usage in many industries and their relevance cannot be overemphasized. In the many months and years to come, we can expect to see more interest in this technology and people exploring its potential, even outside the blockchain.

The Dandelion and Wu Wei Connection The dandelion, with its resilient nature and widespread presence across continents, serves as a symbol of nature's inherent pursuit of balance. Recognizable by its distinctive yellow flowers and fluffy seed heads, this common plant thrives in diverse climates, from grasslands and meadows to bustling urban areas. In its graceful balance of resilience and fragility, the dandelion becomes a living testament to nature's affinity for equilibrium. In parallel, the dandelion encapsulates the essence of Wu Wei, a profound concept in Chinese philosophy. Wu Wei applauds the art of yielding to the natural course of events, advocating for a harmonious acceptance with minimal resistance. Similarly, the challenges in blockchain regulatory compliance seem to have set many in a perpetual cycle, reminiscent of hamsters on a wheel, with tangible solutions remaining elusive. Blockchain Regulatory Challenges: A Perpetual Cycle On the 29th of December 2023, OKX, the second-largest offshore exchange, dropped an unexpected bombshell: the delisting of almost all privacy tokens and suspension of corresponding deposits in the upcoming new year. This abrupt move triggered contemplation within the crypto community, stirring debates among privacy protocol enthusiasts and the general crypto community. As eyebrows were raised and arguments ensued, the essence of Wu Wei permeated the discourse, prompting reflection on whether privacy and compliance can coexist organically. Just as the dandelion releases its seeds effortlessly to the wind, the crypto community pondered the possibility of a harmonious integration, invoking the principle of non-doing in the face of evolving technological frontiers like Zero-Knowledge Proofs (ZKPs) and Secure Multi-Party Computations (sMPCs). Aleph Zero's Philosophical Approach Bound by an unshirkable responsibility to resolve the seeming discord between two powerful, conflicting forces—privacy and compliance—Aleph Zero presents not just a solid argument and a harmonious approach that defines the boundaries of regulatory compliance and privacy, but rather, an attitude that reaffirms their philosophy towards balance and echoes the sentiment that losing a few privacy tokens to exchange delistings isn’t scary; the truly scary thing is complacency in the quest for balance within the intricate scope of blockchain privacy and compliance. A Need for Selective Privacy Selective disclosure of personal information is a common practice in the natural world, driven by the necessity to meet business terms and legal requirements. In a similar vein, Aleph Zero recognizes the importance of individual and enterprise users having both the right to privacy and the tools to customize and selectively disclose their personal information based on individual contextual needs. Users on the network will have the ability to share specific transaction details for legitimate reasons, such as financial audits. For example, during a financial audit, users might choose to reveal specific transactions or financial data relevant to the audit process without exposing their entire financial history. This ensures compliance with auditing requirements while safeguarding personal privacy. Moreover, enterprise users, aware of the linkability challenge, can strategically obscure trade positions and sizes to thwart potential front-running bots. This proactive measure minimizes the risk of others, particularly automated trading algorithms, exploiting information about their trades. By concealing specific details like trade positions and sizes, enterprise users can minimize the risk of others anticipating and profiting from their trading activities. This strategy helps maintain a competitive edge and reduces the impact of potential market manipulation by automated systems. The linkability challenge, a prominent issue in the sender-receiver dynamics of blockchain transactions, prompts users to turn to mixing services to enhance privacy. However, this solution, while effective, presents a contradiction to the decentralized ethos of Blockchain technology. Take Lex, for instance, who utilizes multiple addresses to obscure transactions but remains vulnerable to determined actors like Bob. Through sophisticated tracking methods, Bob could potentially trace and link all of Lex's actions, thereby unveiling Lex's complete transaction history. This poses a substantial risk to Lex's privacy, exposing sensitive information to potential malicious entities. The challenge becomes pronounced as users grapple with the difficulty of achieving genuine anonymity, exacerbated by the inherent traceability of transactions in the blockchain. Balancing privacy measures with the principles of decentralization becomes crucial in addressing this challenge. Is Privacy Negotiable? The negotiability of privacy on the blockchain refers to the extent to which users and blockchain networks can customize or adjust the level of privacy they desire. In conventional blockchain systems, users do not have the flexibility to choose between privacy features and transparency based on their preferences and needs. Instead, end users are constrained by the design philosophy of these blockchains, which is mostly pseudonymity—the default state of most blockchains and the lowest among the privacy spectrum. In the past year, Aleph Zero achieved the restoration of individual prerogative, crucial for privacy negotiability on the blockchain, exerting influence on both individual and enterprise users respectively. Users have the right to define their preferences and set a level of privacy that aligns with their individual needs and concerns. The ability to customize privacy settings empowers users to navigate the delicate balance between maintaining confidentiality and adhering to transparency. This reflects a personalized approach within the blockchain ecosystem, where users are in a position to access company services while keeping their information with them and not on a remote server. Zero-knowledge proofs even let them prove claims without revealing any information at all. ZKPs serve as a powerful method for individuals to verify the validity of statements, whether confirming a cryptocurrency balance in a wallet or validating a user ID. In the case of a wallet address, this cryptographic technique enables the verification of a specific amount of cryptocurrency without the need to disclose the actual balance or any transaction history. Similarly, when applied to a user ID, zero-knowledge proofs allow for proving its validity without revealing the precise ID number. This approach enhances privacy and security in authentication processes, as it enables individuals to demonstrate possession of certain knowledge without exposing the knowledge itself, thereby offering a robust solution for confidential and secure verifications in various contexts. Scaling the Heights: From Trailblazers to Pioneers of the Privacy Frontier Developers delved into Zero-Knowledge Proofs (ZKPs) and Secure Multi-Party Computations (sMPCs) to tackle the scalability trilemma, achieving notable success, especially with Aleph Zero's hybrid approach. This led to the creation of a highly scalable, privacy-enhanced L1 Blockchain with subsecond finality. Moving beyond scalability, the utilization of cryptographic primitives elevates privacy to levels beyond the basic blockchain spectrum. Notably, in privacy-preserving domain name systems (DNS), users can exercise selective disclosure, choosing when to reveal on-chain movements based on contextual needs, thereby enhancing privacy beyond default blockchain settings. Recent privacy developments find crucial applications in DeFi, addressing issues like the MEV problem causing front-running and sandwiching in DEXs. Solutions involving threshold encryption and MPC can mitigate these challenges. Moreover, privacy features enable enhanced price efficiency through innovative order-matching systems within decentralized finance (DeFi) markets. Conclusion The intertwining connection between the resilient dandelion and the profound concept of Wu Wei provides a fitting backdrop to the challenges and innovations in blockchain privacy and compliance. Aleph Zero's commitment to resolving the dichotomy between privacy and compliance is reflected in its acknowledgment of the importance of selective privacy. Aleph Zero distinguishes itself as more than just a privacy coin; its network defaults to transparency, with confidentiality being optional and regulated by AML/CFT/identity products, thereby safeguarding against misuse by bad actors in private operations. Striving for a balance between individual privacy and social responsibility, Aleph Zero provides users with disclosure tools, empowering them to meet business terms or legal requirements. As Aleph Zero scales new heights in the privacy domain, it leaves an indelible mark on the blockchain landscape, offering a harmonious fusion of resilience, privacy, and technological innovation. The dandelion, with its seeds effortlessly carried by the wind, becomes a symbol not only of nature's balance but also of the delicate equilibrium sought in the evolving world of blockchain privacy and compliance.

As the world of blockchain technology continues to evolve, on-chain funding emerges as a transparent and secure method to raise capital for startups and digital projects. One prominent player in this space is AngelBlock, a non-custodial, protocol-based fundraising infrastructure that is transforming how token-based raises are conducted. In this article, we'll explore the intricacies of on-chain funding, the key components of AngelBlock's protocol, and how this decentralized approach is shaping the future of fundraising. How On-Chain Funding Works On-chain funding operates on the public blockchain, providing a transparent and secure way to raise capital for projects. Unlike off-chain funding, which occurs through third-party electronic payment systems, on-chain transactions are reflected in a public ledger, ensuring complete transparency. Exploring On-Chain Governance On-chain governance gives participants voting rights based on their ownership of a native token specific to the network. This decentralized decision-making process is encoded in the blockchain and executed through smart contracts. However, it's important to note that voting powers can be unbalanced, favoring participants with more coins. The rules for implementing changes are proposed by developers and voted on by participants. This process becomes crucial when new blocks need to be added to the blockchain, requiring validation by miners or network participants. The consensus reached in these governance processes ensures the accuracy and security of on-chain transactions. Benefits of Operating On-Chain On-chain funding and operations offer several advantages, making them valuable practices in the crypto and blockchain space. These benefits include: Transparency: Enhanced Trust: Transparency is a cornerstone of on-chain operations, fostering trust among stakeholders. Participants can easily verify transactions, fostering a sense of security and integrity in the system. Community Engagement: The open nature of on-chain transactions encourages community involvement. Stakeholders can actively participate, monitor, and contribute to the project's success. Security: Immutable Transactions: On-chain transactions are immutable, meaning they cannot be altered once confirmed. This feature protects against fraudulent activities, ensuring the integrity of the project's financial transactions. Decentralized Validation: Security is bolstered by the decentralized nature of validation. Instead of relying on a central authority, network participants collectively validate transactions, reducing the risk of malicious activities. Open Accessibility: Global Reach: The decentralized and borderless nature of the blockchain allows projects to reach a global audience. Anyone with an internet connection can participate, fostering inclusivity and diversity in project funding. Equal Opportunity: On-chain operations eliminate traditional barriers to entry, such as geographical location or socioeconomic status. This inclusivity democratizes access to funding, providing opportunities to a broader range of participants. Real-Time Transactions: Efficiency: Real-time transactions offer operational efficiency, especially in scenarios where quick confirmations are crucial. This immediacy is beneficial for various applications, from fundraising to decentralized applications (DApps). Disadvantages of Operating On the Blockchain While the benefits are substantial, it's essential to consider potential disadvantages when opting for on-chain funding: Cost: Transaction Fees: On-chain transactions often incur fees paid to miners for validation services. The cost can vary based on network congestion and transaction volume, potentially making frequent transactions expensive. Time-Consuming: Verification Delays: Despite the intention for real-time transactions, the verification process can face delays, especially during high network traffic. This delay may impact the overall speed of transaction confirmations. Lack of Privacy: Reduced Anonymity: While transparency is a strength, it may compromise user anonymity. Transaction patterns on the blockchain could potentially be analyzed to identify participants, impacting privacy. Complexity: Technical Expertise: Operating on the blockchain requires a level of technical understanding. Startups and participants may face challenges in interpreting and managing the intricacies of on-chain transactions. Understanding these nuanced aspects of on-chain operations provides a comprehensive view of the advantages and challenges associated with this decentralized funding approach. As blockchain technology continues to evolve, addressing these challenges becomes pivotal in maximizing the benefits of on-chain funding. On-Chain vs. Off-Chain: Choosing the Right Path The decision to operate on or off-chain ultimately depends on personal preferences and project requirements. If transparent, verified, and secure transactions are a priority, on-chain operations are the way to go. However, if speed and low transaction fees take precedence, off-chain transactions might be more suitable. AngelBlock: Revolutionizing On-Chain Fundraising Now, let's delve into AngelBlock, a protocol-based fundraising infrastructure that is shaping the future of on-chain fundraising. AngelBlock introduces a milestone-based model, adding an extra layer of security and transparency to the fundraising process. AngelBlock's Milestone-Based Model AngelBlock's protocol functions on a milestone-based model, where startups declare upcoming milestones for project delivery. Each milestone includes deliverables, a specified date, an unlocked budget, the release of tokens, and eligibility criteria for investor voting. Milestone Approval/Rejection Process When a milestone date is reached, the startup must update the milestone description by adding a delivery report. Investor voting then begins, with approval leading to the automatic release of tokens and the startup receiving the budget defined for the milestone. Investors can claim their proportionate share of tokens. If a milestone gets rejected, the startup can announce a repair plan within seven days. Investors then vote on the repair plan, either approving or rejecting it. A rejected repair plan or a rejected milestone without an approved repair plan allows investors to reclaim the budget assigned to the milestone. Validators in the Milestones Approval Process Validators can audit votes given in any voting, removing those that violate the platform's Terms & Conditions. Validators play a crucial role in ensuring the integrity and fairness of the voting process. Additionally, validators have the responsibility of evaluating a startup's performance before the voting starts and assessing milestone delivery. This proactive approach helps maintain a high standard for projects seeking funding through the AngelBlock protocol. Validators act as a safeguard, ensuring that startups adhere to their proposed deliverables and maintain transparency throughout the process. As the AngelBlock protocol evolves, future iterations may introduce new features and enhancements, further refining the on-chain fundraising experience. Continuous improvements in the protocol aim to address any challenges faced by startups, investors, and the broader crypto community. Conclusion On-chain funding, exemplified by platforms like AngelBlock, marks a transformative leap towards a more transparent, accessible, and community-driven fundraising landscape. The inherent features of on-chain operations, including transparency, security, and real-time transactions, position it as a promising alternative to traditional fundraising models. AngelBlock's protocol-based fundraising infrastructure not only underscores the potential of on-chain funding but also serves as a trailblazer in creating a self-sufficient and decentralized network. The commitment to on-chain governance, milestone-based models, and the introduction of validators underscores the platform's dedication to maintaining the highest standards of integrity and accountability. As startups increasingly turn to on-chain funding for capital, AngelBlock stands as an innovative force, reshaping the future of fundraising in the crypto space. The integration of validators introduces an additional layer of scrutiny, emphasizing the platform's commitment to a fair and trustworthy fundraising environment. References: https://angelblock.io/ https://twitter.com/AngelBlock_io https://angelblockprotocol.gitbook.io/angelblock-protocol-overview-documentation/

Introduction The bedrock of transactions that take place on blockchain networks is transparency. Every participant of a blockchain system can see transactions on the network every second as they come in, which is not the case in traditional financial institutions. This transparency has proven effective in creating a trustless system and fishing out individuals and institutions who use crypto transactions for illegal activities as transactions can be traced to wallets. In contrast to what we think, the blockchain system as we know it today gives room for pseudonymity and not actual privacy. Every transaction is publicly visible for everyone to see the addresses behind every transaction but can’t point out the individuals behind the addresses. This, no doubt, has its pros and cons. Anonymity seemed to be enough until recent blockchain projects came into the space and released a range of tools that can link addresses to the real identities behind them within a specific blockchain system. However, the world keeps evolving and the possibilities of technology (including blockchain tech) keep growing. In the search for true privacy, zero-knowledge tech found its way into the blockchain space. With zero-knowledge proofs, users’ privacy is protected as cryptography is used to prove knowledge about data but the content of the data is not revealed. With concerns to data privacy, there is a not-so-new concept called shielded pools utilized by a few blockchains to render transactions untraceable, hence enhancing privacy. What are shielded addresses? Typically, analytical platforms allow users to track real-time data of crypto transactions, enabling them to see all the trades that happen on every token. Block explorers are also publicly available for anyone to monitor transactions and the addresses behind them. As a result of this, MEV attacks happen a lot. This is possible because the addresses are transparent for all to see, making the addresses unshielded. With or without the use of zero-knowledge tech, public addresses can be validated. Conversely, shielded addresses encrypt transaction data and require the creation of ZK-SNARKs to confirm the legitimacy of the transaction. Shielded addresses are provided by “Sapling,” a term presumably first used in Zcash shielding protocol. What are shielded transactions? Shielded transactions are transactions that occur between two shielded addresses. A shielded address sending funds to a shielded address will result in a shielded transaction, just as how an unshielded address sends funds to an unshielded address will result in a transparent transaction (like we’re familiar with). However, a transparent address sending funds to a shielded address will result in a shielded transaction. Zcash, a privacy-focused cryptocurrency is known to have pioneered the use of zero-knowledge tech for privacy (particularly ZK-SNARKs) in the cryptocurrency system. Zcash provides users with the option to send either transparent or shielded transactions. Shielded transactions are encrypted such that information like wallet addresses, amounts, and even transaction history are untraceable. Zcash users can send shielded transactions when they have shielded Zcash addresses. This tends to improve privacy and secrecy. One limiting factor with the Zcash approach is that it supports a single asset only - its native token $ZEC. What is sapling? Sapling is a protocol that facilitates transactions of fungible tokens, through a decentralized tech, to preserve users’ privacy. Sapling offers the shielded transactions feature, which limits transaction participants from viewing addresses and amounts. Aside from making shielded transactions possible, Sapling also reduces computational complexity. What are shielded pools? Just like regular pools, shielded pools are pools comprising crypto asset(s). However, unlike regular pools, even the most basic form of identity (wallet addresses, in the crypto space) of individuals who pool their assets in shielded pools are well hidden from outside observers. They are protocols for depositing tokens with an emphasis on privacy that protects various assets, including fungible and non-fungible tokens. Additionally, shielded pools are designed with algorithms that synchronize user incentives, rewarding users who add tokens to the pool to contribute to shielding. Types of shielded pools Single-asset shielded pools: These are pools that allow for the sending and receiving of a single asset like Zcash does. Multiple-asset shielded pools: These are pools that allow multiple crypto assets to exist in a single shielded pool. Various assets and asset types cohabiting in a pool creates a diversified pool that is large enough to conceal transactions and make them impossible to track The mechanism of typical shielded pools Shielded pools make use of zero-knowledge proofs and encrypted notes. The more tokens deposited in a shielded pool, the more hidden the transactions are in the pool. Let’s examine how shielded transactions, addresses, and pools typically work using our famous on-chain couple, Bob and Alice. Assuming Bob wants to send Alice 350 in the quantity of XYZ tokens from his regular transparent address and he doesn’t want anyone to know anything about the transaction not even the amount. Bob first creates a new wallet containing his shielding address (assuming he doesn’t already own one). He then converts his 350 XYZ to shielded tokens using a shielding protocol, after which he deposits the shielded tokens to the protocol’s shielded pool (where multiple tokens deposited by others also reside). The shielded pool “mixes” the tokens in it so it would be difficult to know the location an output comes from. Meaning, that inputs are not directly linked to outputs. Bob’s newly created wallet is credited with the shielded 350 XYZ and his transparent wallet is debited of 350 XYZ. The 350 XYZ tokens are sent to Alice’s address from the pool and she won’t have much access to other information about the sender except the value of the token sent (if she receives it via a regular public address). However, if she receives it with a shielded address, she can see any other encrypted info sent by Bob. No outsider will be able to trace the transaction because there is no publicly visible record of the transaction data. Shielded pools are more efficient in providing privacy when the tokens are deposited in the pools for a long (or average) period because it will be much more difficult to link a withdrawal to a deposit that took place days after. Few protocols offer options for users to deposit assets in shielded pools but many are yet to grasp the potential of this. A project can employ shielded pools so that only specified asset types on its blockchain can be added to the shielded pool. Benefits of shielded pools Privacy in asset transfers: Shielded pools help keep transactions private and confidential, thereby securing the financial data of users. Voting: Zero-knowledge proofs in shielded pools ensure vote integrity and voters’ anonymity across various blockchains. Improvement in the privacy of DeFi activities: DeFi activities like borrowing, lending, and farming are typically publicly visible for anyone to monitor. With shielded pools, DeFi users can be kept fully anonymous, if they wish to do so. Aleph Zero's shielded pool Aleph Zero’s shielded pool is referred to as Shielder, and here’s how it works: Aleph Zero’s Shielder is a smart contract that employs ZK-SNARKS in ensuring private DeFi interactions. As I earlier mentioned, Shielder, like other shielded pools, makes it impossible for external observers to monitor users’ outputs. Deposit: Users can deposit PSP22 tokens to the Shielder using an Aleph Zero account. The tokens will become encrypted notes inside the Shielder and cryptographic keys will be generated for each user’s deposit. Inside the pool, there are different tokens (now encrypted notes) deposited by other users, so every deposit will be “mixed” to prevent withdrawals from being traced. Withdrawal: For users to withdraw all or part of their deposited tokens, they’ll create a new Aleph Zero account and request their desired amount of tokens using the cryptographic keys. The Shielder smart contract sends the requested funds to the users’ new accounts (eliminating any previous trace to them). The previous notes inside the Shielder will be canceled to accommodate the new notes showing the users' new balances inside the pool. An external observer can see that withdrawals were made but would have no idea who made them because new accounts were used to receive them. Hence, there is no link between the deposit made and the withdrawal carried out. On the other hand, Aleph Zero’s Shielder supports what is called an optional anonymity revoker which is a party responsible for revoking the anonymity (deanonymizing) of users in extreme circumstances. Note: PSP22 is a token standard for any fungible token built using WebAssembly (WASM) smart contract and running on blockchains that are based on the Substrate framework. Aleph Zero fits into the picture as it supports private smart contracts that employ WASM rather than EVM. Also, the Aleph Zero network was built using the Substrate stack. PSP22 is Polkadot Standards Protocol 22 because it was first adopted by the Polkadot ecosystem. It is best referred to as the ERC20 standard for the WASM part of the ecosystem to help differentiate tokens built on WASM smart contracts. How Aleph Zero's flagship product, Common, implements shielded pools to enhance privacy Common is the first product built on the Aleph Zero blockchain. It is a privacy-enhancing DeFi suite that makes trading efficient. It is best known as an order-book DEX that allows users to choose which information to keep private. One of the problems that Common has set itself to solve is the front-running MEV attack, where a trader disrupts a transaction going into the blockchain by copying it but using a higher gas fee to front-run his/her transaction. You can learn more about Common and its general features here, but this piece aims to simplify how Aleph Zero’s DEX, Common, is implementing its shielded pool to enhance the privacy of users who want to use the DEX. Common runs as an order book incorporated with a shielded pool that allows users to trade and place private orders that are only revealed on execution, hence providing confidentiality to users and preventing front-running attacks. The shielded pool protects the details of the values of every order and users can decide to store their assets in the shielded pool as it is optional to do so. Two features make privacy in Common possible and they are ZK-SNARKS and a cryptographic primitive called Decryption Oracle. While ZK-SNARKS helps with anonymity, Decryption Oracle helps users maintain the total confidentiality of their orders. Following Aleph Zero’s commitment toward compliance, Common integrates compliance procedures like KYT (Know Your Transactions) to prevent malicious transactions that are aimed at illegal or criminal activities from entering the shielded pool. Conclusion Late last year, one of the most popular centralized crypto exchanges, OKX announced that it would delist almost all privacy tokens from its platform, advising users to withdraw the affected assets before the delisting date (slated for January 5th, 2024). This action is not foreign as several exchanges have taken steps or attempted to delist or suspend deposits of privacy-related tokens in the past; Huobi, in 2022. This decision often stems from the lack of proper token management policy and compliance success. In OKX’s case, it’s safe to assume that these privacy tokens no longer meet the transparency criterion for spot trading following the concerns about the platform’s outlined listing criteria. Another probable cause for this may be the intensifying pressure on financial privacy which is growing stronger. This news isn’t a cause for alarm as to whether privacy tokens or privacy-enhancing protocols have a future. There are blockchains out there still pushing the gospel of users’ privacy, whilst maintaining their stance on the need to obey compliance obligations. Aleph Zero is a typical example of a blockchain that fits this description. Aleph Zero’s native token is not a privacy token, however, the blockchain is dedicated to its mission of providing an infrastructure for privacy-enhanced projects, as long as they comply with AML/CFT regulations. Its native DEX, Common comes into play by allowing users to trade seamlessly without the feel of a pair of eyes tracking their transactions. Through order batching, multiparty computation (MPC), and the integration of ZK-SNARKs, Common hides order values. When combined with the fact that users never leave the shielded pool when using the platform, you can tell that Common offers a high degree of privacy. References Learn more about Common here Dive into the technicalities of Aleph Zero's shielded pool here

The concept of decentralized exchanges gained popularity with the rise of Ethereum and its ability to support smart contracts. Decentralized finance (DeFi) leverages smart contract functionality to create decentralized financial services, sparking the creation of numerous decentralized financial protocols, exchanges, and instruments. This movement aims to provide users with greater control over their assets and recreate traditional financial systems in a private, secure, decentralized, and trustless manner. DEXes are integral components of the DeFi ecosystem, providing infrastructure for decentralized trading, liquidity provision, and other financial services on blockchain platforms. However, as many innovative DEX designs emerged with different unique approaches to achieving decentralization while facilitating peer-to-peer trading (examples include On-chain order book DEX, Automated Market Maker (AMM) DEX, Offchain order relay DEX, Layer-2 DEX, and cross-chain DEXes), they also introduced trade-offs that gave rise to two prevailing issues: price inefficiency and lack of user privacy. To address these challenges, the development of Common became imperative. Common, currently being developed by Cardinal Cryptography, aims to offer a DeFi solution providing access to robust on-chain privacy features, combining the simplicity of centralized exchanges with the decentralized ethos of a DEX, ensuring that users can trade privately with ease and giving them the most optimal prices out there in the market. Why Common? People opt for centralized exchanges (CEXs) due to ease of use, abundant liquidity they offer through aggregation, providing a larger pool of trading opportunities compared to decentralized exchanges (DEXs), and because the only party that knows a user's transaction detail is the central authority running the exchange. This is in contrast to decentralized exchanges where transactions are often more transparent and "naked" on the blockchain, revealing sensitive transaction data. What Common aims to do is to operate as an order book model combined with advanced cryptographic primitives such as ZK-SNARKS and Decryption Oracles to safeguard user information during trades. Common employs ZK-SNARKs, ensuring anonymity by enabling users to prove possession of essential data without revealing the data itself. This process allows users to demonstrate ownership of certain data (e.g., traded amount or wallet balance) without revealing the sensitive information itself. It provides a strong level of privacy and confidentiality in financial transactions while still allowing verification of the integrity of the data. Decryption Oracle and MPC: Guardians of Confidentiality The Decryption Oracle operates in conjunction with other cryptographic techniques, decrypting information related to users' trades securely. Its instantiation through MPC ensures joint computation without revealing sensitive inputs. The decryption Oracle and Multi-party Computation (MPC) are a vital force in safeguarding confidentiality. Acting like a secret agent, the Decryption Oracle ensures that encrypted trade details are revealed securely, all while keeping personal information private. On the other hand, MPC is like a cryptographic team effort, allowing different players – traders and the exchange itself – to work together on trade computations without exposing individual details. This dynamic duo, the Decryption Oracle and MPC lets everyone involved in trading collectively perform necessary functions like settlements and order matching without revealing sensitive details. This teamwork, crucial in privacy-focused DEXs like Common where users value confidentiality, ensures that trade-related operations are securely computed, keeping the exchange working on encrypted or private data. Through this collaborative approach, Common executes trades without handling or disclosing specific transaction details, providing users with an extra layer of privacy and confidentiality in on-chain financial activities. The amalgamation of ZK-SNARKs, MPC, and the Decryption Oracle ensures a notable level of confidentiality over the amounts involved in trades. This approach goes beyond traditional zero-knowledge proofs, emphasizing a commitment to user privacy. Integration with Shielded Token Pool Common seamlessly integrates with a shielded token pool, enabling users to place orders without exiting the shielded pool. The Decryption Oracle ensures the confidentiality of trade information, contributing to the platform's dedication to user privacy. Fairness Through Aggregated Value and MEV Protection The privacy and fairness of trades are elevated through an innovative mechanism involving the aggregated value of multiple orders. This value remains undisclosed until the crucial moment of order matching, safeguarding against Miner Extractable Value (MEV) exploitation. The Miner Extractable Value refers to the potential profit that miners can extract from the order of transactions in a block beyond the block reward and transaction fees. It arises due to the ability of miners to control the order and inclusion of transactions when they mine a block. The concern stems from the ability of miners and validators to influence the order of transactions within a block, creating economic opportunities for them. This strategic positioning enables miners to extract additional value beyond traditional block rewards and transaction fees. The consequence is a competitive environment where users may find themselves compelled to pay higher gas fees to prioritize their transactions, especially for time-sensitive or dependent transactions. This phenomenon is often labeled as an "invisible tax" within the web3 ecosystem, reflecting the indirect costs users bear as a result of the economic strategies employed by miners. MEV challenges the ideal of a fair and transparent decentralized network, introducing complexities that impact user experiences and perceptions of trustlessness within the blockchain space. Common's MEV mitigation strategy centers around a unique implementation of batching in its decentralized exchange (DEX). Using an order-book model, trades are initially submitted as limit orders with undisclosed amounts and holders. The platform then internally matches these orders within a batch, maintaining privacy. Only after this matching process is complete does the batch become public. This approach aims to make it considerably more challenging for MEV agents to exploit the information, as they are exposed to the details of the trades only after the private matching occurs. By incorporating privacy into the batching technique, Common seeks to minimize the risk of Miner Extractable Value manipulation in its DEX. Swap engine process: Before unveiling the aggregated value, the batch of orders is securely sealed, preventing manipulation by specialized actors. The process then transitions to Common's SWAP-ENGINE, a MEV-aware component designed for optimal trading in two distinct phases: 1. Internal Matching Phase: The Internal Matching Phase directly matches and settles users' orders and trades within the protocol, all while without incurring gas fees. 2. Dutch Auction Phase: The remaining funds undergo a public auction starting from a less attractive price, gradually decreasing block by block. This strategic approach encourages Market Makers to participate, promoting liquidity aggregation from on-chain and off-chain sources. Importantly, this mechanism ensures a substantial portion of MEV profits is redirected back to the users of the Common platform, emphasizing a fair and user-centric approach to decentralized trading. Conclusion Common stands out in the decentralized exchange (DEX) landscape through its seamless integration of an order book with a shielded token pool, ensuring user anonymity. By employing advanced cryptographic techniques such as ZK-SNARKs, order batching, and Multiparty Computation (MPC), Common takes an extra step in concealing the values within orders. This commitment to keeping users within the shielded pool throughout their transactions significantly enhances the overall privacy framework. The amalgamation of these features positions Common as a platform that not only prioritizes privacy but also implements robust mechanisms to safeguard user data, providing a high level of confidentiality in the decentralized trading experience. It's noteworthy that Common's compliance with the privacy layer is inherited from the well-designed Aleph Zero’s ZK- and sMPC-powered privacy engine.

Blockchain technology has emerged as a disruptive force with the potential to revolutionize traditional finance and asset management. The concept of tokenizing real-world assets on the blockchain gained traction as enthusiasts and developers sought to extend the benefits of decentralized systems to traditional assets. Rise of Tokenization and DeFi Protocols This idea garnered significant attention and momentum, especially with the rise of decentralized finance (DeFi) protocols in 2020 — a year that marked a watershed moment for the entire DeFi ecosystem. The ascent of DeFi protocols, often involving asset tokenization, contributed to a broader understanding and acceptance of tokenization concepts. Tokenization found relevance not only in cryptocurrencies but also as a means to represent ownership and facilitate transactions for real-world assets such as real estate, art, and other tangible items. As DeFi projects showcased the blockchain-based tokenization potential in various financial applications, it paved the way for exploring similar approaches beyond decentralized finance. Global markets stand on the precipice of revolution with the tokenization of Real World Assets (RWA). However, the rise of DeFi also brought challenges, including issues related to security, scalability, and regulatory considerations, which also impact the tokenization of real-world assets. What are Real World Assets (RWAs)? Real-world assets (RWAs) are tangible or physical items with a concrete presence that individuals can engage with. They hold intrinsic value, reflecting inherent worth unaffected by market fluctuations. This value is determined by fundamental attributes such as utility, earning potential, and the nature of the assets. These assets are eligible for tokenization on blockchain platforms, facilitating simplified trading and fractional ownership. Examples of real-world assets encompass real estate, treasury bills (T-Bills), bonds, precious metals, art and collectables, music royalties, commodities, and private equity. Crypto and TradeFI: The Convergence To ensure legitimacy and transparency, before a tangible asset can be tokenized or transformed into an RWA, it is imperative to establish the intrinsic value, ownership, and legal standing of a real-world asset before its integration into a blockchain network. This integration, otherwise known as Tokenization, involves transforming the crucial details of the physical asset into tokens on a blockchain. The details of the tokenized assets are embedded in the token's metadata, and its authenticity is easily verifiable. An example is the dollar-pegged stablecoins USDT, and USDC, which are among the successful tokenization implementations of RWA. The Role of RWAs in DeFI Tokenizing Real World Assets (RWAs) presents transformative advantages in crypto finance. Primarily, it injects liquidity into historically illiquid assets, such as real estate. When assets like real estate are tokenized, they can be divided into smaller, tradable units. This enables investors, including entry-level individuals, to buy and sell fractions of these assets, providing a more accessible entry point compared to traditional whole-asset ownership. The tokens can be traded on blockchain-based platforms, creating a more liquid, efficient, and transparent market and facilitating quicker transactions, alleviating the formerly existing liquidity constraints. Through tokenization, these individuals can engage in a more inclusive financial environment, potentially diversifying their investment portfolio and enhancing their financial prospects. Another crucial benefit is fractional ownership, a groundbreaking use case for RWAs. Breaking down assets into tokens enables fractional ownership, reducing entry barriers for everyday users. This facilitates a collaborative ownership model where a group of investors can collectively own a property, with each holding tokens representing their share. Consider a group of individuals interested in investing in a commercial property. Through fractional ownership enabled by tokenization, they can collectively purchase tokens representing shares of the property. For instance, Investor A might own 30% of the property, Investor B 20%, and so on. This approach allows them to pool resources and share ownership without the traditional barriers of needing substantial capital to buy the entire property. Additionally, On-chain transparency ensures the legitimacy of all transactions and ownership details of RWAs, promoting trust and accountability. Overall, the tokenization of RWAs not only diversifies investment opportunities but also promotes inclusivity, attracting new participants and contributing to the stability and growth of decentralized finance (DeFi) markets in its entirety. Limitations and Challenges in RWA Tokenization RWAs, technically categorized as securities, face challenges in widespread tokenization due to regulatory restrictions and the absence of standardized processes. The process involves navigating intricate legal and regulatory requirements, including anti-money laundering (AML) and Know-your-customer (KYC) regulations, which vary significantly across jurisdictions, geolocation, and the chosen blockchain platform for tokenization. Additionally, scalability issues with the host blockchain could lead to transaction delays and hinder the onboarding experience for institutional and enterprise investors. Factors such as high gas fees, regulatory compliance costs, insufficient throughput, and other scalability-related issues may contribute to these challenges. Breaking through RWA constraints: Aleph Zero's Rhetoric Amid the uncertainties surrounding the ability of the RWA industry to thrive and its corresponding challenges, a foreboding silence settled. Yet, through obscurity, the piercing, exuberant trill of Aleph Zero emerged like a lark, lighting up the path with innovative solutions that have the potential to satisfy scalability requirements and regulatory compliance demands without sacrificing user confidentiality. The Aleph Zero Blockchain, leveraging its integration of Zero-Knowledge Proofs (ZK-proofs) and on-chain verified credentials, presents a potent solution to address regulatory compliance challenges by enabling comprehensive tracing of transaction history. This not only streamlines the verification process but also significantly lowers compliance costs for financial institutions. By employing ZK-proofs, the system ensures that parties can authenticate each other without revealing sensitive information—a crucial aspect of meeting regulatory standards while maintaining privacy. The inclusion of on-chain verified credentials further solidifies the reliability and transparency of transaction histories. In essence, the use of these cryptographic tools not only facilitates compliance but also establishes a secure and trustworthy environment for financial institutions to operate within regulatory boundaries. Aleph Zero's Blockchain: A Regulatory-Compliant Solution This method provides financial institutions with a heightened level of assurance and confidence in the origin and legitimacy of funds. Notably, the Aleph Zero network prioritizes privacy by maintaining confidentiality for individuals not directly associated with a particular financial institution. Aleph Zero, an institutional-grade, regulatory-compliant, privacy-enhancing blockchain, ensures instant finality, ensures RWA transactions are quickly confirmed, and provides efficiency and reliability in the transfer of ownership of RWA in real-time. Instant Finality and Its Role in RWA Onboarding Aleph Zero's instant finality is a pivotal element in the onboarding of enterprise-grade personnel to the Real World Assets (RWA) industry, offering multifaceted benefits. Firstly, instant finality substantially reduces the risk of errors in the onboarding procedures. Once a transaction is confirmed, the lack of reversibility ensures a higher level of accuracy and reliability. This is particularly crucial in the context of the RWA industry, where precision in transactions and data is imperative for successful asset management. Additionally, the rapid confirmation of transactions contributes to enhanced security, as the shortened window of vulnerability mitigates the potential for security threats and fraudulent activities during the onboarding phase. Lastly, instant finality promotes compliance and streamlined workflows in the RWA industry. The transparent and tamper-proof transaction records generated by instant finality facilitate adherence to regulatory standards. This not only satisfies compliance requirements but also establishes an auditable trail of onboarding activities. However, a blockchain network with instant finality may face scalability issues because achieving immediate and irreversible confirmation for every transaction can be resource-intensive. On the contrary, highly scalable systems might compromise on finality, leading to longer confirmation times or the potential for transaction reversals in certain circumstances. Revolutionizing Tokenization of RWAs The tokenization of Real World Assets (RWAs) through blockchain technology holds immense transformative potential for the financial landscape. Despite challenges in regulatory compliance and scalability, innovative solutions like Aleph Zero's blockchain, integrating Zero-Knowledge Proofs and instant finality, offer promising avenues to address these issues. The ability to tokenize tangible assets, enhance liquidity, enable fractional ownership, and ensure transparency not only diversifies investment opportunities but also fosters inclusivity in decentralized finance (DeFi). As the industry navigates complexities, the convergence of traditional finance and crypto, coupled with robust technological solutions, paves the way for a revolution in the tokenization of real-world assets.

The Evolution of Smart Contracts and DeFi Landscape The concept of smart contracts originated with Nick Szabo in 1994, predating the rise of cryptocurrencies. However, it wasn't until the launch of Ethereum in 2015 that smart contracts gained widespread attention, enabling the execution of intricate, programmable contracts on its blockchain. Ethereum's introduction of smart contract functionality paved the way for decentralized applications (DApps) and self-executing contracts. Smart contracts automate financial services, facilitating the creation of decentralized applications (DApps) mimicking traditional financial instruments like lending, borrowing, and trading. Decentralized finance (DeFi) harnesses the programmability of smart contracts to construct decentralized financial services, eliminating the need for traditional intermediaries such as banks. This innovation has spawned a diverse array of decentralized financial protocols, platforms, and instruments, granting users greater control over their assets and fostering a more open and accessible financial ecosystem. The Dual Nature of Innovation: Promise and Peril While the allure of continuous innovation propels the crypto industry forward, it exposes vulnerabilities exploited by malicious actors. Following the introduction of smart contract functionality, the crypto industry has grappled with scams, vulnerabilities, phishing attacks, and cybersecurity threats. Immunefi, a Web 3.0 bug bounty platform, reported in November that the sector incurred losses of nearly $1.4 billion in 2023, including a $200 million cyberattack on the Mixin crypto platform. In 2022, $3.2 billion was lost in 60 hacks, increasing to $1 billion in 75 separate crypto heists in 2023. DeFiLlama, a reputable open DeFi analytics platform, revealed that the highest theft in 2023 occurred in September, with hackers making off with $308.23 million. The Imperative for Robust Security Measures The quest for security in the crypto space has led to the rise of smart contract auditing platforms. However, challenges persist as attackers creatively exploit vulnerabilities. CertiK's founder, Ronghui Gu, argued that obtaining a standard smart contract audit is like catching raindrops in a sieve, as cyber attackers often capitalize on finding new and creative ways to exploit protocols and victims, with SIM-swapping and smart contract vulnerabilities among other security pitfalls. Taking up the gauntlet, Coinfabrik, a security auditing company, introduced Scout, Substrate ink!'s first static analyzer for smart contract vulnerabilities. With over 200 confirmed audits since 2014, Scout marks a crescendo in Coinfabrik's commitment to enhancing security within the crypto space, as it is an extensible open-source tool designed to assist ink! smart contract developers and auditors in detecting common security issues and deviations. Language Matters: Addressing Smart Contract Vulnerabilities Smart contract vulnerabilities often stem from the programming language choices in development. These issues can arise due to language-specific features, developer misunderstandings, or limitations. Solidity, a widely-used language for Ethereum smart contracts, exemplifies this susceptibility. Its flexibility can lead to vulnerabilities, such as reentrancy attacks, where malicious contracts exploit unanticipated behaviors, including manipulation of lending pools, liquidity pools, and flash loan attacks. In lending pools, reentrancy attacks may exploit the sequence of calls to withdraw funds multiple times before the state updates, facilitating unauthorized fund transfers. Liquidity pool vulnerabilities could involve manipulating token ratios or front-running transactions for unfair advantages. Flash loan attacks leverage the ability to borrow substantial assets in a single transaction and execute complex strategies. These attacks exploit vulnerabilities in how smart contracts handle external calls, reentrancy, oracles, and more. Mitigating Vulnerabilities with Rust and ink! Rust, a systems programming language, emphasizes memory safety and error prevention. The shift towards more secure languages for smart contracts has given rise to Rust-based subsets like Ink!, designed specifically for blockchain smart contract creation. Ink! incorporates Rust's safety features, including ownership and borrowing, mitigating issues like memory leaks and unauthorized access. Rust's ownership system effectively manages resources, reducing the risk of vulnerabilities like reentrancy attacks. Beyond Language: Coinfabrik's ScoutAudit While secure languages like Rust and subsets, such as Ink!, contribute to smart contract security, the ultimate assurance lies in developers' understanding and adherence to proper coding practices. Language alone does not guarantee security, emphasizing the importance of Coinfabrik's ScoutAudit in ensuring comprehensive and robust security measures. Generously funded by the Web3 foundation and the venerable Aleph Zero network, Scout is a cutting-edge smart contract audit tool designed for Ink! smart contract developers and auditors to detect security flaws in Ink! smart contracts. Achieving absolute foolproof status in smart contract auditing is a formidable challenge, but the ScoutAudit represents a significant stride towards this goal. Ink! is a smart contract development language for blockchains built on the substrate framework, notably Polkadot parachains and Aleph Zero. Therefore, it serves as a specialized smart contract audit tool for developers aiming to build robust and secure smart contracts on Aleph Zero's blockchain. ScoutAudit's mainstay rests on a trifecta of features: a list of vulnerabilities, best practices, and enhancements, together with associated detectors to identify these issues in code; a Command Line Interface (CLI) and a VSCode Extension. ScoutAudit uses a Command Line Interface (CLI) to run a smart contract audit on Ink! related projects. A CLI is a text-based interface that allows users to interact with a computer or software application by typing commands into a terminal or command prompt. Users input textual commands, and the system responds with text output. ScoutAudit provides a CLI as part of its interface, allowing users to execute commands in the terminal or command prompt. This enables developers and auditors to initiate the audit process, specify parameters, and receive results directly through text-based commands. Using the CLI provides a streamlined and scriptable way to integrate Ink! smart contract audits into development workflows and continuous integration processes—a development practice where code changes are automatically tested and integrated into the main codebase frequently. The Scout VSCode Extension enhances the security of smart contract development by identifying and highlighting potential vulnerabilities directly within the VSCode editor. It lists security issues, uses squiggles to indicate problematic areas, and provides additional information or descriptions when a developer hovers their cursor over a specific element, such as a code snippet or error indicator. When developers hover over identified security issues or code sections with potential vulnerabilities, the extension provides additional details or descriptions to help the developer understand and address the problem without having to navigate away from the code editor. This proactive approach enables developers to catch and address vulnerabilities in real-time during the development process, fostering the creation of more secure and robust smart contracts. ScoutAudit boasts a taxonomy of Vulnerabilities including Vulnerability Categories, and Vulnerability Severity, along with common examples of vulnerabilities detected during the development of smart contracts in Substrate Ink!. These parameters are used by the system as a guideline for finding and developing vulnerable examples of Substrate Ink! smart contracts. Vulnerability Severity features an arbitrary classification that provides a structured approach to prioritize and resolve issues based on their severity and potential impact on the system. The Vulnerability Severity is classified into four levels: Critical, Medium, Minor, and Enhancement. Critical issues demand immediate attention as they pose a severe threat to the system. Medium-level concerns are potential security risks that should be addressed promptly to prevent escalating into a bigger problem when combined with other issues and exploitation in the near future. Enhancement classifies issues related to deviations from best practices or language conventions, which, if left unattended, could escalate into higher-priority concerns with future changes. Anthill of the Web3 Savannah Coinfabrik is a research, development, and security auditing company specializing in Web3 solutions and services. With a team of over 60 employees, Coinfabrik is renowned for its flexibility and willingness to adapt to various technologies and frameworks. The team handpicks the most suitable options for their clients without being tied to a specific technological preference. Partnerships with bold startups and top global enterprises, including Web3 Foundation, Microsoft, Verizon, Algorand, Raytheon Technologies, Grupo Salinas, Xapo, Globant, and Agro Token, testify to the effectiveness of their versatile and flexible approach in providing customized web3 services that cater to their clients' needs. Founded in 2014 by Sergio Lerner and Sebastian R. Wain, Coinfabrik is located in five countries across the world, with the company headquarters in Buenos Aires, Argentina, and regional headquarters in Brazil, the USA, Spain, and Italy. With over 200 audits, 90 clients, and 250 projects, Coinfabrik has worked on various Web3 projects globally, including Bitcoin, Ethereum, Polygon, Cosmos, Solana, Polkadot, Stacks, NEAR, and Algorand, among others. The core services offered by the company include smart contract audits, decentralized solution development, consulting services, and education services. As a technologically agnostic company, Coinfabrik also provides other specialized web3 services such as Automated Market Making (AMM) solutions, oracles development solutions, crypto trading bot development, blockchain forensics, prediction markets, and many others. Overall, Coinfabrik resembles a rich botanical garden, where numerous web3 technologies thrive side by side, coexisting harmoniously. By embracing a diverse range of technological options, the company ensures a resilient and flourishing ecosystem capable of adapting to the evolving needs of its projects and clients.

Introduction Navigating the vast ocean of information on smart contracts can be a daunting task, requiring users to decipher complexities armed only with an address and encoded data. In a blockchain landscape witnessing rapid growth akin to bamboo shoots, developers focus on optimizing routine processes and enhancing existing functionalities. However, without a well-curated repository simplifying the intricate aspects and fostering a more informed user experience, the call to "do your own research" resonates, yet exploration tools remain scarce. A repository transforms seemingly intricate information into an accessible format, providing a structured gateway for users to securely engage with information on smart contracts in a risk-free environment. Smart Contract Hub plays a crucial role as a decentralized index and repository for sharing files and information about smart contracts on Aleph Zero, aiming to improve transparency and usability. It includes details such as audit files, ABI files, project specifics, and GitHub links. Ecosystem Support: Aleph Zero’s Funding Program Supported by Aleph Zero’s Ecosystem Funding Program, Smart Contract Hub proves to be a game-changer for developers seeking to streamline their workflow. Developers can easily access ABI (Application Binary Interfaces) files, streamlining their projects and saving significant time in building decentralized applications (dApps). For instance, when writing a smart contract, developers receive a file representation known as the Application Binary Interface (ABI). Each contract has a unique ABI, and for every contract update, a new ABI is generated, ensuring developers can adapt their code to the latest contract interface. Understanding ABIs: The Blueprint of Smart Contracts ABIs (Application Binary Interfaces) serve as standardized blueprints within a smart contract repository, establishing a common way for different contracts to communicate and ensuring interoperability. Developers can follow these archetypes when designing their smart contracts. To interact with an existing smart contract on a blockchain, developers need the contract's address and ABI, typically found in a .json, .contract, or .wasm file. While users or developers may have previously scoured GitHub for these files, Smart Contract Hub streamlines this by allowing users to locate necessary files via the contract's address. For developers and users, Substrate Contracts UI, a web application for deploying and interacting with smart contracts on Aleph Zero blockchains, is crucial in scenarios where there's no other interface available, when verifying smart contract data on a third-party application, or during the deployment of a smart contract. The Role of Smart Contract Hub: A Decentralized Repository Smart Contract Hub plays a crucial role in simplifying the once-challenging task of assessing the safety of engaging with smart contracts. This decentralized platform serves as a valuable resource for both users and developers, providing an easy-to-navigate space to discover ABIs and access essential information about contracts. Developers benefit from Smart Contract Hub by obtaining direct cloud access URLs for ABIs, streamlining their app development process. The platform also encourages collaboration among developers by allowing the sharing of files and information about contracts, simplifying integration efforts, and enhancing auditability. Moreover, Smart Contract Hub offers a range of advantages. In the event of a site being down, developers can seamlessly interact with contracts through the Substrate Contracts UI. This not only ensures continuity but also adds a layer of accessibility to the smart contract ecosystem. Additionally, developers can leverage the platform to promote their products, capitalizing on the vibrant community within Aleph Zero. By contributing smart contracts to Smart Contract Hub, developers increase the visibility of their work. This, in turn, encourages other developers to experiment with and potentially integrate these contracts into their projects, fostering a collaborative and innovative environment within the smart contract landscape. Smart Contract Hub—A Digital Compass in the Smart Contract Landscape In conclusion, looking into the complexities of smart contracts often feels like navigating an uncharted ecological terrain, with users left to minimal guidance—merely an address and encoded data. Smart Contract Hub emerges as a pragmatic solution, a digital compass so to speak, providing users with a robust toolkit, including audit files, ABI details, project specifics, GitHub links, and contributor insights. This arsenal equips users, regardless of their technical prowess, to discern and manage potential risks effectively, transforming the once mysterious process into a transparent and secure interaction with smart contracts.

Another crypto scam pandemic hit when Hong Kong authorities confirmed that 145 people were victims of the $18.9 million crypto exchange scam. Here’s what happened: According to local media Shenzhen Commercial News, on the 27th of November, Hong Kong police announced that 145 people lost $18.9 million (148 million Hong Kong dollars) in a fraud carried out by an illegal cryptocurrency exchange called Hounax. In a bid to notify the Hounax platform of the complaints that have been received, the city’s local police organized a news conference on November 25th to address the issue. According to the Hong Kong Securities and Futures Commission (SFC), Hounax purported to be a legit platform founded by the original Coinbase team and claimed that it was affiliated with reputable financial institutions. The SFC had earlier warned users about the platform's vulnerabilities and labeled it as suspicious on the 1st of this month. Victims, however, claimed that they were convinced to purchase crypto on the exchange but were not able to withdraw afterward. The exchange even claimed to have a license from Canadian regulators, and that it was considering investments from well-known firms like Sequoia Capital and IDG Capital. Ke Yongn, the head inspector of the Hong Kong Police's Commercial Crime Investigation Section, said that the company also used social media to draw in customers but its official Facebook page is no longer active. So far, the police have arrested 66 people under suspicions of being related to the Hounax scam as the investigation is still ongoing. Hounax has joined the list of suspicious crypto platforms on Hong Kong’s SFC list. This event foils attempts in the fight against crypto frauds. This tragic event is similar to what happened with JPEX, another crypto exchange based in Hong Kong. Over $180 million was lost in the JPEX scam which happened in September and is regarded as one of the biggest financial frauds that has happened in the city in recent times.

Navigating the pseudonymous and anonymous facets of blockchain transactions resembles weathering sudden shifts between warmth and cold. Developers find it challenging to maintain an equilibrium between transparency and privacy in the blockchain landscape, caught between hard rock and the deep blue sea as they grapple with the decision to either maintain the traditional banking system status quo that gives preference to pseudonymity or adopt an approach that reaffirms the decentralized ethos of blockchain technology. In the September 2023 edition of ETHWarsaw in Poland, an event organized by a passionate group of local Ethereum enthusiasts connecting a global community of Web3 builders, founders, and educators, Adam Gagol, one of the four co-founders of Aleph Zero, spoke expressively about the future of anonymity and how Aleph Zero's blockchain innovatively compensates for the falling standards of blockchain privacy. Pseudonymity, Anonymity, and Blockchain Pseudonymity, the default state in most blockchains, provides users with a layer of privacy by allowing them to transact using a wallet address rather than their real name. Sounds familiar? Of course, it is. Banks often use account numbers or pseudonyms to represent account holders, and these identifiers are not publicly disclosed. However, the actual account activity and details are accessible to the bank and authorized entities for regulatory and security purposes. This, however, poses challenges when examining the sender-receiver relationship. For instance, when Alice sends cryptocurrency tokens to Bob, the transaction is recorded on the blockchain, and visible to anyone. While Alice's identity remains concealed behind her pseudonym, the transparency of blockchain raises concerns about traceability. By interacting with Bob, Alice risks revealing her entire transaction history! However, Anonymity, the next level in the spectrum, introduces a degree of privacy by concealing the identity of the sender or the party involved in a transaction. If, for example, Alice sends tokens to an undisclosed recipient, the on-chain record shows the action but the identity of the transacting parties is entirely undisclosed, is less common in traditional banking, and is a distinguishing feature of certain blockchain systems. Privacy, the most stringent level, ensures that only the fact that a transaction occurred is visible to the public. Cryptographic techniques are employed to mask the actual content of the transaction. For instance, if Alice initiates a transaction, cryptographic data is published on-chain, making the details indecipherable to anyone except the transacting parties. Challenges in Anonymity The practical implementation of anonymity in blockchain encounters various challenges, as illustrated by the sender-receiver dynamics. One prevalent issue is the linkability problem. Even if Alice utilizes multiple addresses to obfuscate her transactions, determined actors, such as Bob, could employ sophisticated tracking methods and potentially trace and link her actions, unveiling her entire transaction history. This poses a significant threat to user privacy, exposing sensitive information to potentially malicious entities. The challenge becomes apparent as users find it difficult to achieve true anonymity due to the traceability of transactions. To address these challenges, users like Alice often resort to third-party mixing services, where a centralized entity, like an exchange such as Binance, acts as an intermediary for transactions. Alice deposits tokens on Binance, and the exchange facilitates their transfer to a new address, enhancing privacy. However, this centralized solution contradicts the decentralized ethos of blockchain technology, introducing a centralization paradox. Aleph Zero's Response Aleph Zero recognizes the limitations of existing solutions and introduces innovative approaches to enhance privacy without relying on centralized services. Leveraging cryptographic advancements, specifically zk-SNARKs (Zero-Knowledge Succinct Non-Interactive Arguments of Knowledge), Aleph Zero introduces a form of invisibility cloak, a technique that allows multiple users to deposit tokens into a pool and withdraw them using cryptographic proofs, creating a seemingly untraceable link between the sender and receiver. The Dilemma of Misuse Privacy-enhancing techniques, such as Aleph Zero's, offer significant advantages but also raise concerns about potential misuse. Cryptocurrency mixers, including well-known ones like Tornado Cash, have been exploited by hackers for money laundering. There have been cases where illicit funds accounted for a substantial percentage of transactions within anonymity pools. According to federal investigators, mixing services is increasingly popular among cybercriminals as a means of hiding and moving illegal profits. Tornado Cash was accused of knowingly allowing the Lazarus Group to launder money on behalf of the North Korean government in the spring of 2022. This misuse prompts governments to take action, impacting both malicious users and those seeking legitimate privacy. Introducing Liminal: Aleph Zero's Secret Sauce In response to the challenges posed by misuse and regulatory actions, Aleph Zero explores a multifaceted approach to strike a balance between user privacy and countering illicit activities. According to Aleph Zero's co-founder, one of the oldest tricks in the books is the voluntary review mechanism, otherwise known as the concept of viewing keys, which allows users to maintain full anonymity while providing cryptographic proofs when necessary. This empowers users like Alice to selectively reveal transaction details for legitimate purposes, such as financial audits, without compromising their overall privacy. Proof of innocence, another avenue explored by Aleph Zero, attempts to address the linkability problem. By providing cryptographic proof that funds did not originate from a blacklist of addresses, users like Alice can demonstrate the origin of their funds and hence, the legitimacy of their transactions. However, challenges such as the dynamic nature of blacklists and the need for frequent updates present hurdles in the practical implementation of this approach. Aleph Zero's unique proposition lies in the introduction of external review controllers. These controllers act as external entities with knowledge of user IDs and possess the authority to make decisions when illicit activities are detected in an anonymity pool. The review controller concept involves assigning an ID to Alice within the system. When a hack is detected, the external controller, potentially a KYC provider or a committee, decides whether to reveal or withhold entire trades associated with the illicit address. This controller can be a single party, a group sharing a secret, or even a Decentralized Autonomous Organization (DAO) determining which addresses are considered illicit. Unlike traditional blacklists, the challenge lies in safeguarding the secret within the review controller. Creating a DAO for this purpose is trickier than blacklisting, as it requires not only a decision-making mechanism but also a secure storage solution for the sensitive secret. While more challenging, sharing secrets in larger committees remains feasible for this purpose. This introduces an additional layer of oversight, offering a potential solution to the problem of misuse. The controller's decision to reveal or withhold transaction details provides a dynamic mechanism to counter illicit actions. In Adam Gagol's closing remarks, he addresses the challenges posed by the complex issues of pseudonymity, anonymity, and the centralization paradox in blockchains. He explored three strategies to counter these challenges: proof of innocence, voluntary reviews, and review controllers. Gagol states, "In Aleph Zero's privacy solution, Liminal, we're targeting the review controller in evolving ways. We're starting with a very simple approach and planning to form larger committees, and perhaps we'll experiment with proof of innocence. However, the technical problem is challenging, requiring a cryptographic breakthrough to make it operational.” The Future of Anonymity Aleph Zero's Liminal is the first hybrid interchain privacy framework that offers innovative security measures based on a unique combination of zero-knowledge proofs (ZK-SNARKs) and Secure Multiparty Computation (sMPC). It is a hybrid privacy protocol that seeks to provide a robust and holistic approach to safeguarding sensitive information, covering both reactive and proactive dimensions of privacy and security. In review controllers, the external entity (controller) makes decisions post-hack, determining whether to disclose or withhold information. This mirrors the need for privacy in the ZK-SNARKs scenario, where a prover produces concise proof, convincing a verifier of correct computations without revealing personal data. Similarly, sMPC addresses privacy concerns by keeping sensitive data off-chain on multiple nodes. Access requires a secure handshake among nodes, preventing any single entity from accessing encrypted contents without unanimous consensus. This aligns with the challenge of safeguarding secrets within the review controller, requiring secure storage and decision-making mechanisms. Together, these approaches contribute to a comprehensive strategy for protecting sensitive information at various stages of data handling within the Liminal privacy framework. Conclusion In conclusion, as we navigate the thicket of pseudonymity, anonymity, and the centralization paradox in blockchains, the innovative solutions presented by Aleph Zero, particularly the Liminal framework, showcase the ongoing efforts to strike a delicate balance between user privacy and countering illicit activities. The challenges posed by misuse highlight the importance of continually refining these privacy-enhancing techniques. Anonymity in blockchain technology calls for not only technical breakthroughs but also an understanding of the ethical and regulatory dimensions associated with privacy and security. As Adam Gagol rightly emphasizes, the journey toward a more private and secure blockchain future involves experimenting with various strategies, such as proof of innocence, voluntary reviews, and external review controllers. The technical complexities may be challenging, but they pave the way for a future where blockchain users can enjoy the benefits of privacy without compromising the integrity of the decentralized ethos.

Countries worldwide spend trillions of dollars combined in research and development (R&D) to get an edge over others. Whether it’s the space race, manufacturing, or defense, security, and intelligence, countries with low R&D are guaranteed to be left behind. Likewise, businesses (small, medium, or large) that fail to adopt new technology and invest in R&D to optimize their systems, processes, and people will lose significance and disappear altogether. At a fundamental level, research starts by asking curious questions, which aims to push the frontiers of human knowledge. Academics at universities, research institutes, or independent research organizations usually carry out this type of fundamental research. The application and utility of fundamental research aren’t always obvious to outsiders, and its impact is rarely felt outside the academic bubble. However, in the research, innovation, and development pipeline, there is another phase of research that aims to ask how the knowledge generated by fundamental research can be applied to resolve real-world problems. The findings from applied research can be used to commercialize ideas. Businesses and institutions then use these findings to innovate new or improved products and services. Innovation happens when research is applied outside the academia to benefit any part of society. This is where academics work with businesses to turn their projects into goods or services to generate revenue and ultimately boost the economy. This commercialization of knowledge and ideas is vital for the sustainability of any sector, especially research endeavors that usually rely on grant funding or philanthropy. This post summarizes the evolution of Aleph Zero — a rapidly emerging privacy-enhancing public layer-1 blockchain —  from their humble origins in R&D to a leading service and infrastructure provider in Web3. We will also provide a forward look at Aleph Zero, focusing on its use of R&D to innovate and improve its products and services. Research at Cardinal Cryptography Aleph Zero was founded by Cardinal Cryptography, which is an R&D company specializing in Web3. Aleph Zero’s co-founders and early team members (from Cardinal Cryptography) have strong academic and research backgrounds ranging from PhDs in mathematics, computer science, and cryptography. Naturally, the team took an academic approach by spending years of scientific research that led to the development of Aleph Zero. As such, we can trace Aleph Zero’s origin to pure research where the Cardinal spent years developing the Aleph Zero protocol. The team understood the real-world potential of blockchains (see the summary of applications here). However, they quickly realized that existing Distributed Ledger Technologies (DLTs) were implemented with shortcomings and inefficiencies that acted as a barrier to bringing their and others’ ideas to fruition. Commonly referred to as the “blockchain trilemma” (issues related to security, scalability, and decentralization), challenges are generally associated with privacy, security, scalability, speed, and cost. The Cardinal team realized that the industry must overcome these challenges before making truly groundbreaking products. That is when they started years of rigorous research to look for innovative and novel solutions to help the industry overcome these challenges. The team sought to create a thorough solution to the problem of how to transmit data and value across networks with high throughput and quick confirmation in a decentralized manner. The result was an ideation of a novel consensus protocol that uses a DAG architecture as an intermediary data structure. Aleph Zero aimed to solve the industry-wide challenges by combining their consensus protocol with the Substrate stack and introducing an original, software-based privacy layer (Liminal) on top of the network. Cardinal Cryptography’s research, which resulted in the Aleph Zero consensus protocol was published as a novel scientific paper. The protocol was peer-reviewed before being accepted for publication in the conference proceedings of Advances in Financial Technology* in 2019. This paper serves as the original Aleph Zero whitepaper. Business whitepaper is also available for non-academic audiences. Peer review publications may seem trivial, but it’s far from it. To understand why, we must know a bit about peer review. (*Peer-reviewed academic publications are usually locked behind a paywall by publishers, which is also the case for Aleph Zero’s publication. You can read the open-access version of the whitepaper here.) Peer review When scientific teams conduct research, they write up their finding in the form of a scientific paper, which they submit to academic publishers to be printed in their prestigious journals. However, publishing invalid and poor-quality articles is against the scientific and public interest. Therefore, publishers use peer review to assess the validity, quality, and often the originality of scientific papers. Peer review acts as quality control for academic journals and helps maintain the integrity of science. To carry out the peer review, journals anonymously send the paper —  submitted for publication by the scientific team — to experts in the field and request them to assess the paper against quality, rigor, and validity. 3–5 field experts usually review the paper before a decision is made by a journal to either reject or accept the scientific article for publication. Papers may also be suggested for additional improvements, data, or further experimentations before being considered for publication. This is an extremely rigorous process and is the gold standard in scientific assessment where research is validated by peers and experts in their field. In other words, only the cream of the crop is likely to make it past peer review. Aleph Zero’s whitepaper was independently assessed and verified by experts in mathematics and cryptography. The team also invites anyone interested to review their research, provide constructive feedback, and participate in discussions. The Aleph Zero Foundation and Cardinal Cryptography team have also done some heavy research in collaboration with Nethermind Research to develop the whitepaper for Common, an order book with privacy. Nethermind is a powerhouse in blockchain R&D having delivered pioneering research and development for leading web3 projects, including Ethereum, Starkware, Aave, EigenLayer, Lido, and dYdX amongst others. The Common whitepaper is also undergoing peer review with assessment outcomes expected soon. The implementation of the Common whitepaper as the product is expected to be released in Aleph Zero’s testnet soon with mainnet launch in the first half of 2024. Learn more about Common here. Other R&D services and recognition The Cardinal team members  -  Dr. Adam Gągol (Ph.D), and Dr. Damian Straszak, (Ph.D)  -  also collaborated with Casper Labs to develop the whitepaper for the Casper blockchain consensus protocol. The Casper network’s protocol is called “Highway”, and it has several benefits over classic Byzantine Fault Tolerant (BFT) consensus protocols. Highway protocol allows networks to reach higher thresholds of finality, meaning that more blocks are finalized, and validators agree to add them to the blockchain. It’s a testament to the R&D credentials of the Cardinal Cryptography team that they were approached to collaborate on the development of the consensus protocol for one of the leading enterprise-focused Layer 1 blockchains. In addition to receiving the recognition and validation of web3 and the academic community, Aleph Zero and Cardinal Cryptography have also won several prestigious competitions and awards for their product. Below is a summary of prizes and recognition that the team has received from a range of organizations and institutions. Kraków Technology Park (KPT), 2021: winner of the startup of the year. The KPT is the most complete one-stop shop for businesses operating in Poland. Aleph Zero competed against startups from all sectors in Poland to secure this award. European FinTech Hackcelerator, 2022: Joint winners of the European hackcelerator contest, which presented the team with a chance to represent Europe in the Global FinTech Hackcelerator. The European FinTech Hackcelerator is an international, tailor-made program for startups ready to expand to the Southeast Asian market and looking for global partners and clients. Global FinTech Hackcelerator, 2022: The team was one of the finalists in the Global hackcelerator event. This event is sponsored by the Monetary Authority of Singapore and seeks to unlock the potential of Financial Technology in accelerating the development of Web3 and Green Finance solutions. Next Block Expo, 2023: winner of the best infrastructure project, where Aleph Zero competed against Mantle, BNB Chain, and Polygon to secure this award. Next Block Expo is also known as the blockchain festival of Europe attracting a range of web3 founders, investors, and communities. European Blockchain Convention, 2023: Top 3 in Europe’s top blockchain startup of the year. The European Blockchain Convention aims to accelerate the blockchain ecosystem in Europe and it attracts a global audience of founders, investors, regulators, developers, corporations, and many more. Deloitte Central Europe, Technology Award 2023: 2nd place in the “companies to watch” category. Aleph Zero and Cardinal Cryptography came above several businesses in Central Europe to rank second amongst companies that show great potential but are too young to meet the criterion for the main Fast 50 category. Summary Aleph Zero and its core developer Cardinal Cryptography started with research and building on their research, they have managed to develop an innovative product that helps resolve classical barriers that DLT technology faced. Their thorough approach to R&D has received recognition and validation from academic peers, web3 researchers and projects, and industrial partners. The team's journey along the research, innovation, and development pipeline has been rapid and is continuing a steep trajectory with the imminent launch of several high-quality and anticipated products, including Common. With such a strong research base and a high-performing team, we may see the team make more discoveries leading to future innovations in web3 and beyond.