On-chain Privacy: Mixers, Stealth Addresses, and Compliance

On-chain Privacy: Mixers, Stealth Addresses, and Compliance

Intermediate
Security
• ~9 min read
• Updated: 08/08/2025

Public blockchains are transparent by default: account balances, transfers, and contract
interactions can be traced forever. That’s great for auditability but bad for personal and business
confidentiality. This guide surveys practical techniques for improving privacy, the trade-offs involved,
and how to stay within compliance boundaries.


1) What can be deanonymized?

  • Linkable addresses: funding patterns & transfers correlate EOAs together.
  • MEV & mempool leaks: pending txs reveal action before inclusion.
  • Off-chain metadata: IP address / RPC provider logs, wallet analytics, device IDs.
  • App-level IDs: referral codes, account linking in dapps, email/ENS reuse.

2) Mixers & Pool-based Privacy

Mixers (a.k.a. tumblers) create an anonymity set by pooling deposits and later allowing withdrawals
to unrelated addresses. Modern designs use zero-knowledge proofs to prove ownership without
revealing which note was deposited.

  • How it works: deposit → receive note/commitment → prove knowledge → withdraw elsewhere.
  • Limits: size and freshness of the anonymity set; on-ramp/off-ramp clustering; sanction risk.
  • Mitigations: wait time between deposit/withdrawal, relayers for gas, diversified denominations.
Note: Some mixers or addresses may be sanctioned in certain jurisdictions. Interacting with
them can cause wallet or exchange blocks. See the compliance section below.

3) Stealth Addresses & One-time Keys

With stealth addresses, the receiver advertises a public viewing key; the sender derives a unique
one-time address using Diffie-Hellman-like tricks. Funds land in an address that only the receiver can scan
and spend, but outsiders can’t link payments to the receiver’s identity.

  • Great for donations, payroll, NFT airdrops where recipients don’t want balance linkage.
  • Needs wallet support for scanning and spending from derived addresses.
  • Pairs nicely with account-abstraction & paymasters to hide funding patterns.

4) ZK Proofs & Private Payments

ZK systems (zk-SNARKs/zk-STARKs) let you prove “I have valid funds and I sent them” without
revealing who sent what to whom. Examples include shielded pools and privacy-enabled L2s.

  • Benefits: strong privacy with on-chain verification; programmable privacy (selective reveal).
  • Costs: proving time, gas costs, trusted set-ups (for some SNARKs), UX complexity.
  • Design tips: consider viewing keys, auditability hooks, rate limits for Sybil resistance.

5) Metadata Hygiene (what most users miss)

  • Prefer RPCs that support privacy / MEV-protection and avoid logging IP ↔ address mappings.
  • Avoid address reuse; rotate EOAs and label them by purpose (trading, salary, cold storage).
  • Don’t reuse ENS names, emails, or socials across “clean” and “private” personas.
  • Use session keys / smart accounts for dapps; hide funding with paymasters.
  • Beware of analytics/telemetry in mobile wallets and browser extensions.

6) Compliance: Sanctions, KYC walls & “Responsible Privacy”

Teams can ship privacy while respecting rules:

  • Blocklists / allowlists: restrict UI usage for sanctioned addresses while keeping contracts neutral.
  • Selective disclosure: viewing keys or audit keys for voluntary proofs to banks / exchanges.
  • Rate limits / spending limits: reduce mixer abuse while preserving everyday privacy.
  • Jurisdictional notices: warn users about local restrictions; collect no more data than necessary.
Reminder: This guide is educational, not legal advice. Regulations differ by country.
Consult counsel before launching privacy features at scale.

Further resources

← Smart Contract Risks
NFTs & Rights: Metadata, Royalties, Licenses →