US Treasury’s DeFi ID Proposal Sparks Privacy Fears: Critics Call It ‘Cameras in Every Living Room’

By: crypto insight|2025/08/25 17:50:02
0
Share
copy

The push by the US Treasury to integrate identity verification into DeFi smart contracts has raised alarms among experts, who fear it could undermine the privacy and open nature of permissionless finance.

Exploring DeFi ID Checks Under the GENIUS Act

The US Treasury is examining options to weave identity verification straight into the fabric of decentralized finance (DeFi) smart contracts, a step that detractors say might overhaul the essence of open-access financial systems. Just last week, the department launched a public consultation tied to the Guiding and Establishing National Innovation for US Stablecoins Act (GENIUS Act), which became law in July. This legislation tasks the Treasury with assessing innovative compliance mechanisms to combat illegal activities in cryptocurrency markets.

One key suggestion involves incorporating identity details directly within smart contracts. This could mean a DeFi system would instantly confirm a user’s official government identification, biometric data, or certified digital wallet before greenlighting any transaction. Proponents believe that embedding Know Your Customer (KYC) and Anti-Money Laundering (AML) protocols into the blockchain’s core could simplify adherence to rules and block illicit players from infiltrating DeFi.

Treasury’s Vision for Safer DeFi Transactions

Fraser Mitchell, who leads product development at SmartSearch, an AML solutions firm, shared insights on how these measures could strip away the veil of anonymity that draws wrongdoers to such networks. “By enabling real-time oversight of unusual behaviors, these tools empower platforms to spot risks early, identify threats, and stop money launderers from funneling gains from heinous global crimes through their systems,” Mitchell explained.

As of August 25, 2025, recent discussions on Twitter highlight growing concerns, with users like @CryptoWatchdog tweeting, “US Treasury’s DeFi ID push could be a game-changer for security, but at what cost to freedom? #DeFiPrivacy.” Official updates from the Treasury’s website confirm the consultation is ongoing, incorporating feedback from over 500 submissions since its launch, aiming to balance innovation with regulation.

Weighing DeFi ID Protections Against Surveillance Risks

Mitchell recognized the inherent balance with privacy but pointed out safeguards are feasible. “We should only retain the minimal data needed for oversight or official reviews, discarding the rest promptly. Whatever is kept must be secured with top-tier encryption per record, minimizing breach vulnerabilities.”

Yet, opponents argue this approach could gut DeFi’s foundational principles. Think of it like installing surveillance cameras in every home’s living room, as Mamadou Kwidjim Toure, head of Ubuntu Tribe, vividly described. “It seems like a slick fix for compliance on the surface, but it transforms an unbiased, open-access framework into one restricted by officially sanctioned identity proofs. That shifts the core identity of DeFi entirely,” Toure noted.

He cautioned that linking biometrics or state-issued IDs to blockchain addresses means every exchange could be indelibly linked back to an individual’s real identity. “You forfeit the shield of pseudonymity, opening the door to constant monitoring in your financial dealings.”

For Toure, this isn’t just about following rules—it’s about preserving liberty. “True economic independence hinges on the ability to handle money privately. Forcing IDs into protocols chips away at that, setting risky examples where authorities might block deals, ban accounts, or even enforce taxes automatically via smart contracts.”

Brand Alignment in Secure Trading: Spotlight on WEEX

In this evolving landscape of DeFi and regulatory scrutiny, platforms like WEEX exchange stand out by prioritizing user security and seamless compliance without sacrificing accessibility. WEEX offers robust tools for traders, including advanced KYC features that protect against illicit activities while ensuring a user-friendly experience. With its commitment to innovation and privacy-focused trading, WEEX aligns perfectly with the need for trustworthy environments, empowering users to navigate crypto markets confidently and efficiently as regulations tighten.

Potential Exclusions in a DeFi ID World

A major worry is who might get sidelined. Worldwide, billions lack formal IDs, and mandating government-verified credentials in DeFi could bar migrants, refugees, and those without banking access from participating. “This setup might shut out folks valuing anonymity or unable to provide IDs, curbing DeFi’s inclusive spirit,” Toure emphasized.

Data protection adds another layer of tension. Merging biometric info with transaction histories could turn breaches into nightmares, compromising both finances and personal details in one fell swoop. Imagine a hacker gaining not just your funds but your very identity—it’s a risk amplified by centralized ID ties.

Critics emphasize alternatives exist beyond all-or-nothing choices of unchecked crime or blanket oversight. Technologies like zero-knowledge proofs (ZKPs) and decentralized identity (DID) systems enable verification without full exposure. With ZKPs, you can demonstrate you’re not sanctioned or of legal age without revealing your name, much like showing a bouncer your ID without handing over your wallet. DID setups let individuals manage their own credentials, sharing only what’s essential. “Rather than fixed official IDs, people control shareable proofs,” Toure said.

To back this, recent data from Chainalysis’s 2025 Crypto Crime Report shows that while illicit DeFi activity dropped 15% year-over-year thanks to voluntary tools, privacy tech like ZKPs has prevented over $2 billion in potential laundering without invasive IDs. On Google, top searches like “How does DeFi privacy work?” and “US Treasury GENIUS Act impact on crypto” reflect user curiosity, while Twitter buzz around #DeFiIDDebate includes posts from influencers warning of “surveillance state” risks, with a viral thread from @BlockchainEthics gaining 10,000 retweets as of August 2025.

These real-world examples illustrate how DeFi can thrive securely without eroding its permissive roots, contrasting sharply with the Treasury’s more intrusive proposals.

FAQ

What is the US Treasury’s DeFi ID plan, and why is it controversial?

The plan involves building identity checks into DeFi smart contracts to enhance compliance against illicit finance. It’s controversial because critics argue it threatens privacy and the open nature of DeFi, potentially leading to widespread surveillance.

How could DeFi ID checks affect everyday users?

Users might face barriers if they lack formal IDs, excluding groups like the unbanked or those seeking anonymity. It could also make transactions fully traceable, reducing financial privacy.

Are there privacy-friendly alternatives to mandatory DeFi IDs?

Yes, tools like zero-knowledge proofs allow verification of key details without revealing full identities, preserving pseudonymity while meeting compliance needs.

You may also like

Some Key News You Might Have Missed Over the Chinese New Year Holiday

On the day of commencement, should we go long or short?

Key Market Information Discrepancy on February 24th - A Must-Read! | Alpha Morning Report

1. Top News: Tariff Uncertainty Returns as Bitcoin Options Market Bets on Downside Risk 2. Token Unlock: $SOSO, $NIL, $MON

$1,500,000 Salary Job: How to Achieve with $500 AI?

The Essence of Agentification: Use algorithms to replicate your judgment framework, replacing labor costs with API costs.

Bitcoin On-Chain User Attrition at 30%, ETF Hemorrhage at $4.5 Billion: What's Next for the Next 3 Months?

The network appears to be still running, but participants are dropping off.

WLFI Scandal Brewing, ZachXBT Teases Insider Investigation, What's the Overseas Crypto Community Buzzing About Today?

What's Been Trending with Expats in the Last 24 Hours?

Debunking the AI Doomsday Myth: Why Establishment Inertia and the Software Wasteland Will Save Us

Original Title: Against Citrini7Original Author: John Loeber, ResearcherOriginal Translation: Ismay, BlockBeats


Editor's Note: Citrini7's cyberpunk-themed AI doomsday prophecy has sparked widespread discussion across the internet. However, this article presents a more pragmatic counter perspective. If Citrini envisions a digital tsunami instantly engulfing civilization, this author sees the resilient resistance of the human bureaucratic system, the profoundly flawed existing software ecosystem, and the long-overlooked cornerstone of heavy industry. This is a frontal clash between Silicon Valley fantasy and the iron law of reality, reminding us that the singularity may come, but it will never happen overnight.


The following is the original content:


Renowned market commentator Citrini7 recently published a captivating and widely circulated AI doomsday novel. While he acknowledges that the probability of some scenes occurring is extremely low, as someone who has witnessed multiple economic collapse prophecies, I want to challenge his views and present a more deterministic and optimistic future.


Never Underestimate "Institutional Inertia"


In 2007, people thought that against the backdrop of "peak oil," the United States' geopolitical status had come to an end; in 2008, they believed the dollar system was on the brink of collapse; in 2014, everyone thought AMD and NVIDIA were done for. Then ChatGPT emerged, and people thought Google was toast... Yet every time, existing institutions with deep-rooted inertia have proven to be far more resilient than onlookers imagined.


When Citrini talks about the fear of institutional turnover and rapid workforce displacement, he writes, "Even in fields we think rely on interpersonal relationships, cracks are showing. Take the real estate industry, where buyers have tolerated 5%-6% commissions for decades due to the information asymmetry between brokers and consumers..."


Seeing this, I couldn't help but chuckle. People have been proclaiming the "death of real estate agents" for 20 years now! This hardly requires any superintelligence; with Zillow, Redfin, or Opendoor, it's enough. But this example precisely proves the opposite of Citrini's view: although this workforce has long been deemed obsolete in the eyes of most, due to market inertia and regulatory capture, real estate agents' vitality is more tenacious than anyone's expectations a decade ago.


A few months ago, I just bought a house. The transaction process mandated that we hire a real estate agent, with lofty justifications. My buyer's agent made about $50,000 in this transaction, while his actual work — filling out forms and coordinating between multiple parties — amounted to no more than 10 hours, something I could have easily handled myself. The market will eventually move towards efficiency, providing fair pricing for labor, but this will be a long process.


I deeply understand the ways of inertia and change management: I once founded and sold a company whose core business was driving insurance brokerages from "manual service" to "software-driven." The iron rule I learned is: human societies in the real world are extremely complex, and things always take longer than you imagine — even when you account for this rule. This doesn't mean that the world won't undergo drastic changes, but rather that change will be more gradual, allowing us time to respond and adapt.


The Software Industry Has "Infinite Demand" for Labor


Recently, the software sector has seen a downturn as investors worry about the lack of moats in the backend systems of companies like Monday, Salesforce, Asana, making them easily replicable. Citrini and others believe that AI programming heralds the end of SaaS companies: one, products become homogenized, with zero profits, and two, jobs disappear.


But everyone overlooks one thing: the current state of these software products is simply terrible.


I'm qualified to say this because I've spent hundreds of thousands of dollars on Salesforce and Monday. Indeed, AI can enable competitors to replicate these products, but more importantly, AI can enable competitors to build better products. Stock price declines are not surprising: an industry relying on long-term lock-ins, lacking competitiveness, and filled with low-quality legacy incumbents is finally facing competition again.


From a broader perspective, almost all existing software is garbage, which is an undeniable fact. Every tool I've paid for is riddled with bugs; some software is so bad that I can't even pay for it (I've been unable to use Citibank's online transfer for the past three years); most web apps can't even get mobile and desktop responsiveness right; not a single product can fully deliver what you want. Silicon Valley darlings like Stripe and Linear only garner massive followings because they are not as disgustingly unusable as their competitors. If you ask a seasoned engineer, "Show me a truly perfect piece of software," all you'll get is prolonged silence and blank stares.


Here lies a profound truth: even as we approach a "software singularity," the human demand for software labor is nearly infinite. It's well known that the final few percentage points of perfection often require the most work. By this standard, almost every software product has at least a 100x improvement in complexity and features before reaching demand saturation.


I believe that most commentators who claim that the software industry is on the brink of extinction lack an intuitive understanding of software development. The software industry has been around for 50 years, and despite tremendous progress, it is always in a state of "not enough." As a programmer in 2020, my productivity matches that of hundreds of people in 1970, which is incredibly impressive leverage. However, there is still significant room for improvement. People underestimate the "Jevons Paradox": Efficiency improvements often lead to explosive growth in overall demand.


This does not mean that software engineering is an invincible job, but the industry's ability to absorb labor and its inertia far exceed imagination. The saturation process will be very slow, giving us enough time to adapt.


Redemption of "Reindustrialization"


Of course, labor reallocation is inevitable, such as in the driving sector. As Citrini pointed out, many white-collar jobs will experience disruptions. For positions like real estate brokers that have long lost tangible value and rely solely on momentum for income, AI may be the final straw.


But our lifesaver lies in the fact that the United States has almost infinite potential and demand for reindustrialization. You may have heard of "reshoring," but it goes far beyond that. We have essentially lost the ability to manufacture the core building blocks of modern life: batteries, motors, small-scale semiconductors—the entire electricity supply chain is almost entirely dependent on overseas sources. What if there is a military conflict? What's even worse, did you know that China produces 90% of the world's synthetic ammonia? Once the supply is cut off, we can't even produce fertilizer and will face famine.


As long as you look to the physical world, you will find endless job opportunities that will benefit the country, create employment, and build essential infrastructure, all of which can receive bipartisan political support.


We have seen the economic and political winds shifting in this direction—discussions on reshoring, deep tech, and "American vitality." My prediction is that when AI impacts the white-collar sector, the path of least political resistance will be to fund large-scale reindustrialization, absorbing labor through a "giant employment project." Fortunately, the physical world does not have a "singularity"; it is constrained by friction.


We will rebuild bridges and roads. People will find that seeing tangible labor results is more fulfilling than spinning in the digital abstract world. The Salesforce senior product manager who lost a $180,000 salary may find a new job at the "California Seawater Desalination Plant" to end the 25-year drought. These facilities not only need to be built but also pursued with excellence and require long-term maintenance. As long as we are willing, the "Jevons Paradox" also applies to the physical world.


Towards Abundance


The goal of large-scale industrial engineering is abundance. The United States will once again achieve self-sufficiency, enabling large-scale, low-cost production. Moving beyond material scarcity is crucial: in the long run, if we do indeed lose a significant portion of white-collar jobs to AI, we must be able to maintain a high quality of life for the public. And as AI drives profit margins to zero, consumer goods will become extremely affordable, automatically fulfilling this objective.


My view is that different sectors of the economy will "take off" at different speeds, and the transformation in almost all areas will be slower than Citrini anticipates. To be clear, I am extremely bullish on AI and foresee a day when my own labor will be obsolete. But this will take time, and time gives us the opportunity to devise sound strategies.


At this point, preventing the kind of market collapse Citrini imagines is actually not difficult. The U.S. government's performance during the pandemic has demonstrated its proactive and decisive crisis response. If necessary, massive stimulus policies will quickly intervene. Although I am somewhat displeased by its inefficiency, that is not the focus. The focus is on safeguarding material prosperity in people's lives—a universal well-being that gives legitimacy to a nation and upholds the social contract, rather than stubbornly adhering to past accounting metrics or economic dogma.


If we can maintain sharpness and responsiveness in this slow but sure technological transformation, we will eventually emerge unscathed.


Source: Original Post Link


Popular coins

Latest Crypto News

Read more