Why Zero-Knowledge Proofs Shift Power from Platforms to Users

Platforms like Google and Facebook monetize user data because they are the trusted verifiers of identity and activity. This creates rent-seeking intermediaries and privacy risks.

• User data is the asset, but platforms capture ~90% of the value.
• Centralized verification creates single points of failure and censorship.
• Compliance (KYC/AML) requires total exposure, sacrificing privacy for access.

A ZK proof allows a user to cryptographically prove a statement is true (e.g., 'I am over 18', 'I have sufficient funds') without revealing the underlying data. The platform only needs to verify the proof.

• Shift in Power: Verification logic moves from platform servers to user clients.
• Unbundling Trust: Platforms become service providers, not data custodians.
• Composable Privacy: Proofs can be reused across applications (e.g., a zkKYC proof for DeFi, gaming, and voting).

These L2s use ZK proofs for scaling, but their real power shift is via Account Abstraction (AA). AA lets users define custom security logic (social recovery, multisig) and pay fees in any token, all verified by ZK.

• User-Owned Security: No more seed phrase anxiety; recover via social guardians.
• Sponsored Transactions: Apps can pay gas for users, removing UX friction.
• Session Keys: Grant limited permissions (e.g., for a game) without exposing full wallet control.

Mina's entire blockchain state is verified by a constant-sized (~22KB) ZK proof (a zk-SNARK). This allows users to verify the chain's integrity with a smartphone, eliminating the need to trust centralized RPC providers.

• Democratized Verification: Anyone can be a light client with full security.
• Ends RPC Reliance: Breaks the infrastructural monopoly of providers like Infura/Alchemy.
• Snapps: Privacy-preserving apps that use on-chain data without exposing user queries.

Aztec uses ZK proofs to enable fully private transactions and shielded DeFi interactions on Ethereum. Users can deposit, swap, and earn yield without exposing amounts or addresses.

• Total Privacy: Balances and transaction graphs are hidden on-chain.
• Composability: Private assets can interact with public DeFi via bridges.
• Regulatory Clarity: Provides auditability via viewing keys for compliance, without default surveillance.

General-Purpose ZK VMs (zkVM) allow any program written in Rust or C++ to be proven in ZK. This commoditizes proof generation, enabling developers to build custom privacy and verification logic without cryptography expertise.

• Developer Freedom: Build ZK apps using standard languages and toolchains.
• Prover Market: Decentralized networks can compete to generate proofs cheapest/fastest.
• Universal Layer: zkVMs become a trustless compute base layer, challenging centralized cloud providers.

ZK's security depends on honest prover nodes. If proving becomes a capital-intensive, centralized service (e.g., a few dominant sequencer-provers like StarkWare or zkSync), we recreate the platform risk we aimed to escape.\n- Risk: Single points of failure and censorship.\n- Metric: If >66% of L2 proofs come from <5 entities, decentralization fails.\n- Trigger: ASIC/GPU proving races creating insurmountable economies of scale.

Many ZK systems (e.g., zk-SNARKs) require a one-time trusted setup ceremony. A compromised ceremony is a perpetual backdoor. While newer zk-STARKs avoid this, they face other trade-offs.\n- Risk: Catastrophic, undetectable cryptographic failure.\n- Mitigation: Large MPC ceremonies (e.g., Zcash, Tornado Cash), but participation is still limited.\n- Vector: Insider attacks or sophisticated cryptanalysis on flawed parameters.

For users to truly verify their own state, they must run light clients that verify ZK proofs. If verification costs >~$0.10 or requires >~5s on a mobile device, mass adoption of self-verification dies.\n- Result: Users default to trusting third-party verifier APIs, recreating the web2 trust model.\n- Progress: Nova and Lasso seek to reduce verification overhead, but mobile remains a challenge.\n- Consequence: Sovereignty becomes a premium feature, not a default.

ZK proofs are not natively interoperable. A StarkEx proof is meaningless to an EVM verifier. This creates walled gardens of provable state, forcing users back to trusted bridges like LayerZero or Wormhole for cross-chain activity.\n- Risk: Liquidity and user experience fracture across ZK islands.\n- Solution Space: Proof aggregation layers (Succinct, Polyhedra) and universal verification (EIP-7212).\n- Failure Mode: ZK L2s become faster, cheaper silos, not a unified web of sovereignty.

ZK aims to abstract gas fees via paymasters and account abstraction. However, someone must pay the prover. If this cost is socialized or subsidized by a central entity (e.g., the L2 foundation), it creates unsustainable economics and central control.\n- Risk: When subsidies end, user experience breaks, or a centralized paymaster becomes a censor.\n- Example: Visa-like entities could emerge as dominant fee payers, dictating transaction policy.\n- Requirement: Decentralized fee markets for proof generation must emerge.

ZK circuits are software. A bug in a circuit (e.g., ZK-EVM opcode implementation) or its surrounding L1/L2 bridge smart contract can lead to irreversible loss. Formal verification tools are nascent and expert-only.\n- Risk: A single circuit bug can invalidate the entire security model, as seen in early zk-rollup audits.\n- Attack Surface: Complex circuits for DeFi primitives are especially vulnerable.\n- Lag: Verification tooling development lags far behind circuit innovation.

Platforms like Facebook and Google built empires on proprietary user data. ZKPs (e.g., zk-SNARKs, zk-STARKs) allow users to prove attributes (age, credit score, holdings) without revealing the underlying data, rendering the data hoard worthless.

• Key Benefit: Enables trustless compliance (DeFi KYC) and personalized services without surveillance.
• Key Benefit: Opens markets for privacy-preserving identity (Worldcoin, Polygon ID) and data attestation.

Trust is no longer bundled with execution. ZKPs separate proof generation (provers) from verification (verifiers), creating a new market layer.

• Key Benefit: Enables ultra-light clients and trust-minimized bridges (zkBridge, LayerZero's future ZK path).
• Key Benefit: ~500ms verification unlocks new architectures where cheap L1s (Ethereum) secure expensive L2s (zkRollups) via proof verification alone.

Traditional transactions reveal intent, creating MEV extraction opportunities. ZKPs allow users to submit encrypted intents or proofs of desired state changes.

• Key Benefit: Protocols like UniswapX and CowSwap can be enhanced with ZK to hide order flow until settlement, neutralizing frontrunning.
• Key Benefit: Enables private voting (e.g., Aztec) and sealed-bid auctions, shifting value from validators/searchers back to users.

Collateral inefficiency plagues DeFi (e.g., overcollateralized loans). ZKPs enable proofs of off-chain creditworthiness or cross-chain collateral positions without locking assets.

• Key Benefit: Enables undercollateralized lending based on proven, private credit history.
• Key Benefit: Single asset can be provably used as collateral across multiple chains simultaneously, unlocking $10B+ in trapped liquidity.

Today, AI models are black-box services. ZK Machine Learning (ZKML) allows a model's inference to be proven correct without revealing the model weights or input data.

• Key Benefit: Users can verify an AI agent (e.g., trading bot, content moderator) acted as promised, creating trustless automation.
• Key Benefit: Enables monetization of private models via proof-of-inference, not API access, disrupting the OpenAI/Anthropic platform model.

The winning plays aren't just new L2s. Power accrues to the layers that abstract complexity: proof recursion, hardware acceleration, and developer tooling.

• Key Benefit: Invest in RISC Zero, Succinct for generalized proof systems. Ingonyama for ZK hardware.
• Key Benefit: The 'AWS of ZK'—services that turn a 5-hour proof generation into a 5-cent, 5-second API call—will capture the bulk of value.