Hello, I am Fernando López, a blockchain engineer who has worked on the ISBE (Spanish Blockchain Services Infrastructure) project, one of the first regulated blockchains in Europe, such as the European EBSI project.
I really liked your proposal and was wondering if there was already a project in place to integrate regulated stable coins, USDC and EURG, into the ecosystem.
On the other hand, the user privacy aspect is fantastic. But there is still room for improvement. I miss zero-knowledge proofs in the wallet’s CORE. Has this been ruled out for any reason? It would be another interesting development to turn this wallet into a true ZK wallet.
Finally, the idea of integrating stablecoins does not seem very difficult. It would be to have an exchange with a private key that endorses these crypto assets, or even better, that listens for a smart contract that receives them. All that would be needed is to design a plugin adapted to the wallet so that it understands a contract deployed on a public network, or a permissioned network such as ISBE, as an exchange.
The development of the ZKP is somewhat more complex. And here I’d better hear your view on this idea, lest it has been ruled out for some reason.
Congratulations on the initiative launched,
Cainuriel.
@Cainuriel thanks very much for your interest and message, indeed while Taler can be used with blockchains assets, AFAIK no one has yet looked into using stable coin with Taler.
However we are currently focusing with NGI Taler on integrating Taler to the Eurozone and this would most certainly not fall under the scope of the open calls.
Well, I’ve had a quick look and perhaps my analysis isn’t very in-depth, but let me explain:
Taler already uses advanced cryptography (Blind Signatures) to hide who pays what. Therefore, using ZKP to hide the transaction is redundant.
However, Taler has a limitation in my view: Identity and Attributes.
The exchange knows who is withdrawing (because it sees the source account) and the merchant knows what is being sold, but no one knows if the buyer has the ‘right’ to buy without revealing their identity.
With some type of credential verifiable by a competent authority, we could create a zero-knowledge proof that would NOT REVEAL ANY PERSONAL DATA, such as verifying that the buyer is of legal age without revealing any private data.
With ZKP during withdrawal, the necessary or regulatory required proofs (age, nationality, solvency) are generated without breaking the anonymity of the expenditure.
This is my take on it after a cursory review of your project.
No call for proposals is interested in promoting MiCA regulation? I believe that Europe has made an enormous regulatory effort, as have companies. This would be an opportunity to normalise the use of cryptocurrencies. MiCA promises legal protection. But if we do not provide services to companies in their use, they will continue to be stigmatised.
On the other hand, can’t an exchange be independent?
Perhaps only specific financial institutions can be. If so, I understand why they are not interested in using stable coins, even though it would be a revolutionary service.
Perhaps here, the banking system is resisting an operation that could compete with them.
There is ZKP of age verification already implemented in GNU Taler. I guess the Attribute-Based Credentials you’re mentioning (“nationality, solvency”) are in contradiction with Taler’s privacy-by-design, since they would enable using Taler to restrict buyers’ capacity. Age restriction is an exception since it is a legal requirement and makes sense in a free society. I’m wondering what “necessary or regulatory required proofs” you’re thinking about in this regard.
Regarding stablecoins, an upcoming paper on Taler and Stablecoins is in the pipes and should be released soon. It should provide more insight on where Taler stands in this regard.
Yes I see what you are pointing to and it seems it would absolutely make sense in the context of the upcoming EIDas
I was only pointing to the focus of NGI taler open calls, not at the general scope of the existing calls. from the commission. Indeed there are certainly pertinent calls existing.
Note that: MiCA is not directly relevant to Taler. Taler is a wallet, it is not an asset nor a crypto asset.
Absolutely exchanges are independent, and can support any chosen currency as long as it has the required licences.
What should I be looking out for to find out about this document as soon as it is released? Your position on this matter is essential to understanding your disagreements and reservations.
Therefore, in theory, there would be no issue with an exchange operating with regulated crypto assets as if it were operating with other currencies.
Nor do I believe that creating a plugin that facilitates connection to blockchain environments goes against the governance of your open source project, right?
Yes indeed, technically no issue, it would certainly have impact on the Taler ecosystem and if you intend to work on this it would be great to talk about it.
There is no governance on this specific issue as far as I know.