Sau lệnh cấm của Dubai, công cụ quyền riêng tư thực sự không chết đi

Dubai Financial Regulatory Authority today announced a ban on privacy tokens and mixers like Tornado Cash at the Dubai International Financial Centre, citing anti-money laundering and sanctions risks. This ban seems to sentence privacy tools to death, but recent market reactions show the situation is much more complex. On one side, regulations are tightening; on the other, demand remains strong. Privacy tools are at a delicate yet tense crossroads.

Core Content of the Regulatory Ban

The Dubai International Financial Centre (DIFC) is one of the most important financial hubs in the Middle East. The ban covers two aspects:

Privacy tokens are blacklisted

Prohibited privacy tokens include Monero, Zcash, and others with native privacy features. The regulatory logic is straightforward: privacy functions inherently conflict with AML regulations because transactions cannot be traced.

Mixers become key targets

Mixers like Tornado Cash are explicitly banned. The risk with these tools is that they can turn any token into a “privacy token,” breaking traceability along the transaction chain.

This is not an isolated incident. According to the latest news, major global financial centers are strengthening controls over privacy tools, with Dubai being the latest.

Market Reactions Show Divergence

Interestingly, simultaneous with the ban announcement, the market shows two completely opposite signals.

Funds are fleeing Tornado Cash

Reports indicate that the total value locked (TVL) in the 100ETH pool on Tornado Cash has decreased by 40% over the past week, with over 120,000 ETH transferred. This appears to be a direct response to regulatory pressure—funds are withdrawing from high-risk platforms.

Legitimate user demand persists

More noteworthy is the story behind large ETH transfers. On-chain analysis shows Richard Heart transferred 162,937 ETH via Tornado Cash over the past four months, linked to his new project ProveX. ProveX uses zero-knowledge proof technology to achieve fully trustless peer-to-peer transaction settlement.

What does this imply? It indicates that legitimate users continue to use these tools, and their volume is not insignificant.

Hacker money laundering continues

On January 11, a hacker exploited Truebit protocol and laundered 8,535 ETH (worth $26.36 million) through Tornado Cash. This reflects another reality: as long as privacy tools exist, they will be used for illegal purposes.

Deep Industry Divisions

The ban also exposes fundamental disagreements within the crypto industry.

Vitalik’s stance: privacy is a right

Ethereum co-founder Vitalik Buterin recently publicly supported Tornado Cash developer Roman Storm, emphasizing that developing privacy software should not be considered a crime, and revealing he has used the software for transactions. This demonstrates the tech community’s commitment to privacy rights.

Regulatory stance: privacy is a risk

Financial regulators’ logic is clear: privacy tools cannot be effectively regulated and must be banned. Anti-money laundering and sanctions compliance are bottom lines.

Emerging solutions’ stance: compliant privacy is the way out

The most interesting are third-party voices. Projects like Dusk Network propose the concept of “programmable compliant privacy”: user transaction data is encrypted by default, but regulators can perform real-time audits under authorized conditions, protecting privacy while ensuring compliance. Some European banks are already adopting such solutions.

Future Directions for Privacy Tools

Based on the ban and market reactions, the evolution of privacy tools is becoming clear:

From absolute anonymity to auditable privacy

Tornado Cash represents an era of “completely untraceable” privacy, but this path has been blocked by regulators. Future privacy tools must consider compliance from the design stage.

Technological innovation accelerates

Zero-knowledge proofs, privacy layer designs, and other technologies are rapidly iterating, aiming to protect user privacy while leaving audit interfaces for regulators. This is a technical challenge, but projects are already exploring it.

Market segmentation will intensify

Some privacy tools may disappear due to regulatory pressure, while others survive through compliance transformations. Users will also differentiate: those seeking absolute privacy will turn to fully decentralized solutions, while those prioritizing compliant privacy will choose new-generation tools.

Summary

The Dubai ban reflects a broader global trend of tightening regulation, but it will not end privacy tools. The real change is that privacy tools are shifting from being “regulatory opponents” to “regulatory tools.”

Three key points: First, regulatory bans are a long-term trend; privacy tools must proactively embrace compliance. Second, market demand remains strong—both legitimate and illegitimate users have privacy needs. Third, the technological direction is clear: the next generation of privacy tools will be “auditable privacy,” not “absolute anonymity.”

In other words, privacy tools will not die—they are transforming. Projects that can balance privacy protection and compliance will be the future winners.