On our last post we talked about how token confidentiality shouldn't just be assigned in a random format but rather it should follow certain aspect from 1 leading to another and not assigned randomly. Thread 3 takes this a step further by focusing on design target.
As mentioned on previous posts, token confidentiality is not all about staying hidden from the entire public, but rather it stays auditable and verifiable at all time. In short, a state where it can be audited and verified while also presenting the need to know basis, say balance can be hidden from the public while also staying auditable when a need arise.
Design target:
Transfers stay verifiable and auditable.
Amounts and balances stay out of public view.
Stay clear of two poles:
1️⃣ Fully transparent public ledger
2️⃣ Unauditable black box
Three lenses:
🔹 Strong privacy as default — amount privacy first; keep addresses public by default
🔹 Controlled disclosure — user, authorized, audit, and regulatory paths
🔹 Tracing key governance — threshold, rotation, audit, committee.
Thread 3 talks about this in a tabular format like previous threads, with each section explaining the why, in other words, a complaince x privacy tension map.
It goes from fully transparent public ledger to Unauditable black box and subsequent sub which are Risk, Capability, and Governance.
To read the entirity of thread 3 then checkout PlatON official X page here Deep read 3
As usual, do ensure to follow PlatON and turn on notifications to get new and trending info as they come by.