Open Money and transparency

Open Money's digital ledger creates interesting dynamics

Open Money is transparent. Its transparency, however, is often misunderstood.

When early Open Money systems first launched, one of the most talked-about features was privacy. In the early days of Bitcoin, a thriving underground economy emerged around the belief that Bitcoin was private money — an untraceable digital cash system. People assumed they could buy anything on the internet, including illegal drugs, without leaving a traceable footprint.

For a time, this illusion of privacy held. But not because Bitcoin was inherently anonymous — rather, because forensic accountants, data analysts, and law enforcement agencies hadn’t yet developed the tools to make sense of the vast web of cryptographic transactions. The long strings of alphanumeric characters that recorded Bitcoin transactions seemed, at first, like an impenetrable cipher.

That has changed. Today, advanced blockchain analytics firms, such as New York-based Chainalysis, can construct intricate financial narratives from public ledger data.

They track the movement of cryptocurrencies across exchanges, identify illicit financing, and map the financial networks of criminal enterprises. But it’s not just high-end forensic firms that have access to these insights. A growing ecosystem of open-source analytics dashboards now enables anyone to scrutinize onchain activities, tracing the pulse of blockchain economies in real time.

This level of transparency is a double-edged sword. On one hand, it’s a powerful tool for accountability. It allows the public to verify claims, observe financial flows, and even detect fraud. The downfall of FTX, for example, was first signaled by anomalies in public blockchain data. Observers noticed inconsistencies in fund movements, triggering scrutiny that eventually unraveled one of the largest financial scandals in crypto history.

But transparency comes at a cost — privacy. The very feature that makes Open Money systems robust and auditable also exposes users to unprecedented levels of financial visibility.

Unlike traditional banking, where only institutions and regulators can see transaction histories, blockchain transactions are, by default, open for all to inspect. The early belief that Bitcoin provided anonymity was, in retrospect, a fundamental misunderstanding: pseudonymity is not the same as privacy. Once a wallet address is linked to an identity, all past and future transactions associated with that address are laid bare.

So where does that leave privacy in an Open Money world?

Not all Open Money systems are equally transparent. While public ledgers like Bitcoin and Ethereum offer full traceability, privacy-focused innovations are emerging. Technologies like zero-knowledge proofs (ZKPs) provide a potential middle ground. Zero-knowledge cryptography allows transactions to be validated without revealing their details, striking a delicate balance between transparency for accountability and privacy for individuals.

The mainstream adoption of ZKPs and similar privacy-preserving techniques will shape the next phase of Open Money. Financial systems should not require users to choose between absolute transparency and absolute secrecy.

Instead, they should offer modular privacy — flexible solutions that allow transparency where needed (for institutions, regulatory oversight, and public trust) while safeguarding individual financial autonomy.

This post is part of the Open Money project, an ongoing series that forms the basis of a longer work. Subscribe to get a weekly update as it unfolds.

Recent Open Money project posts