When the US government sanctioned the Ethereum-based Crypto Mixing Service Tornado Cash in 2022, it ignited a debate within the crypto community that continues three years later.

Tornado enabled users to transfer crypto anonymously. The government claimed that the service relieved money laundering, causing some of Ethereum’s validators and blocking builders to take steps to avoid engaging with Tornado-connected transactions, making the service slower and more expensive to use.

Attorneys claimed that compliance with the sanctions constituted censorship – undermined a basic cypherpunk principle. President Donald Trump supported cypherpunks and lifted the sanctions against Tornado Cash in March this year, but for some Ethereum developers highlighted the situation an error within the network that still exists today: Why do users have to depend on third-party apps to shop privately on the network?

“Publicly available transaction graphs provide any opportunity to track the flow of funds between accounts, and Saldi is visible to all participants in the network, undermining financial privacy,” crypto security researcher Pascal Caversaccio explained in a blog post on Wednesday. “While the transparency of the Ethereum network promotes trustlessness, it also opens the door to potential surveillance, targeting and exploitation.”

Maybe again, ideas have begun to make ideas to make the Ethereum network at its core at its core at its core at its core at its core.

“Privacy must not be an optional feature that users deliberately need to activate-it must be the standard state of the network,” said Caversaccio, whose post outlined his vision for a privacy-oriented Ethereum schedule. “Ethereum’s architecture must be designed to ensure that users are by default, not with exception.”

Caversaccio’s posts identified several potential interventions-some new ones, some old ones, according to him, could make Ethereum more private for end users. One idea is to encrypt Ethereum’s public mempool – where transactions are sent before registering permanently. Another involves making Ethereum transactions confidential through zero-knowledge cryptography, new transaction formats and other methods.

“Today, Ethereum operates in a partial, opt-in privacy model, where users have to take conscious steps to hide their financial activities at the expense of ease of use, accessibility and even efficiency,” Caversaccio wrote. “This paradigm needs to change. Privacy preservation technologies must be deeply integrated at the protocol level, so transactions, smart contracts and network interactions are inherently confidential.”

In response to Caversaccio’s post, Ethereum-Medfifer Vitalik Barterin left a comment on the network’s most important developer forum with its own much shorter privant-oriented Ethereum schedule.

Butterin suggested focusing on the privacy of payments on the chain, anonymizing activity on chain in applications, making communication on the network’s anonymous and privatizing on-chain readings.

To achieve all this, butterin listed different steps such as integrating certain third -party privacy functions into the nucleus.

One of the more significant interventions suggested by Barterin involves moving the network towards a “address per application” model – a departure from today’s system where a single application can use dozens of wallets for different functions. “This is a big step and it involves significant convenience of the convenience, but IMO This is a bullet that we need to bite because this is the most practical way of removing public connections between all your activity across different applications,” butterin wrote.

According to butterin, if all his proposals are implemented, private transactions may be standard at Ethereum.

The discussion of privacy comes a few weeks before Ethereum’s next big upgrade, Pectra, which does not have a major focus on privacy. Ethereum developers are also currently planning the network’s following upgrade to Fusaka. The changes to be included in the hard fork are not yet set in stone.

Read more: Vitalik Butterin disappointed with the embrace of blockchain “casinos”