RFC: Proposal for a strategic alliance between Namada and Zcash


Hi Zcashers! I’ve actually been involved with Zcash for a long time - right when Zcash originally launched, under the alias “lustr0”, I wrote the first version of the Zchain explorer (although I no longer operate it) - and I’ve long been a fan, and occaisionally a user, of the Zcash network. In this post, I represent the Anoma Foundation, and I’m going to discuss our upcoming plans with regards to Namada and Zcash. Before I do that, though, let me first explain a bit about what these entities are.

The Anoma Foundation is a non-profit organisation charged with the stewardship of the Anoma ecosystem. The foundation is seated in Zug, Switzerland, and the current board members are Awa Sun Yin, Adrian Brink, and Christopher Goes (myself). You can find the registry entry here. The foundation is currently coordinating the launch of the upcoming network Namada, an early chain in the Anoma ecosystem, and plans to propose a genesis block for Namada in spring 2023. Namada is a proof-of-stake layer-1 blockchain designed to provide asset-agnostic shielded transfers for any interoperable crypto-asset (initially any asset from the Ethereum or Cosmos ecosystems). Namada builds on the Sapling circuit originally developed by the Electric Coin Company - we’ve added multi-asset functionality and assets conversions which are used to implement shielded set rewards. You can learn more about Namada here and about our circuit development work here (we also posted about it on the Zcash forums awhile back).

As part of launching Namada, we’d like to give kudos to Zcash and lay the groundwork for many potential areas of future collaboration. The rest of this post describes several ideas for doing so that we’ve brainstormed together with the assistance of members of the Zcash community. Now, we’d like to reach out and to get an idea how the Zcash community feels about this and would be delighted if you could provide some feedback. This post is just a proposal, so please ask questions, express opinions, and make suggestions (also, check out the list of specific questions at the end of the post below).

Namada :heart: Zcash

Namada couldn’t have come into existence without the technical contributions and socio-economic programme of the Zcash community, and we would like to give material thanks back to the Zcash community in addition to verbal credit. This material thanks takes two forms. First, Namada plans to earmark some tokens and inflation for the benefit of the Zcash ecosystem, either in the form of a donation to the Zcash Sustainability Fund or in the form of a grants pool. We hope that this contribution will help align the interests of both networks and encourage continued collaborations in the long-term. Second, Namada plans to airdrop some tokens to existing Zcash holders. We hope that this airdrop will provide a little bit of retroactive public goods funding directly to folks who have financially supported Zcash development in the past by holding & using the asset. Let’s dive a bit more into each of these forms in turn.

Contribution to the Zcash ecosystem: Grants pool & ZSF

First, the Anoma Foundation plans to make a genesis block proposal with a portion of the Namada genesis supply, and a portion of recurring inflation per annum (with Namada’s continuous public goods funding mechanism), dedicated to the benefit of the Zcash ecosystem. Initially, these funds will be used to establish a grants pool, operated in collaboration with Zcash ecosystem participants, that will fund projects which benefit both the Zcash and Namada ecosystems. This grant pool will be organised on the basis of specific RFPs, starting with an RFP (request for proposals) for a Zcash ↔ Namada bridge (see below). Later on, more RFPs may be added for specific project opportunities - we may put up some ourselves, and members of both the Zcash and Namada communities will be able to submit RFPs for consideration. At first, these earmarked funds will be escrowed by the Anoma Foundation, staked (thus accruing staking rewards), and used to pay out for successful grant applications. In the future, we hope to be able to hand stewardship of this funding stream over to the Zcash community by, for example, incorporating it into a future iteration of the Dev Fund or the Zcash Sustainability Fund, where distribution is subject to the Zcash community’s consensus.

To spell that out in a bit more detail, we understand that the Zcash community is considering implementing the Zcash Sustainability Fund. We also understand that the Zcash Sustainability Fund has not yet been implemented and would need to go through a process of Zcash community governance before being accepted as an upgrade to the Zcash network. Should the Zcash community choose to implement and activate the Zcash Sustainability Fund or some similarly flexible pay-in/pay-out mechanism, these funds could be paid into it (further context), and then out to whatever recipients the Zcash community decides upon. We’d like to make clear that the Anoma Foundation does not take a position on whether or not the Zcash community should choose to implement and activate the Zcash Sustainability Fund - we’re excited about the idea, and we’d be happy to contribute to it, but that decision is up to Zcashers - Namada will dedicate this pool of funds to the Zcash ecosystem and we’ll do our best to help out either way.

Airdrop to ZEC holders

Second, the Anoma Foundation plans to make a genesis block proposal with a direct airdrop (allocation of NAM, the Namada staking token) to current Zcash holders. We would like for this airdrop to cover all ZEC, including both transparent and shielded. Transparent and Sapling pool ZEC are straightforward. We’d like to airdrop to Orchard ZEC as well, and we’re currently investigating the legal requirements of doing so. A snapshot date has not yet been decided, but it will be after the publication of this post. The snapshot date shouldn’t matter much because Zcashers do not have to do anything in advance anyways. Airdrop rates will be calibrated such that shielded ZEC receives slightly more than transparent ZEC (so there’s no time like the present to shield your ZEC :smile:). Depending on engineering timelines, as there are several moderate-complexity programming efforts requried, these distributions may happen at various times, possibly after the mainnet of the Namada blockchain later this spring.

Areas of collaboration

Zcash ↔ Namada bridge

Another way that the Anoma Foundation would like to contribute to the Zcash ecosystem is by facilitating the establishment of a bridge between Zcash and Namada. We think this is important because it will allow Zcash and ZEC to connect to and flow to and from other chains, increasing both individual freedom for users of ZEC and collective reasons for the Zcash ecosystem and other ecosystems to collaborate. Through Namada, Zcash & ZEC can connect to the Cosmos ecosystem and the Ethereum ecosystem, and through those nearly everywhere else. We also think that a bridge to a proof-of-stake system in particular may be appealing, since it will allow Zcashers and ZEC users to experience what proof-of-stake is like (and even what different variants of it are like) before committing Zcash to a particular proof-of-stake upgrade path.

The technical details of this bridge are not yet entirely fixed, and we aim to come to consensus between relevant stakeholders including the Electric Coin Company, the Anoma Foundation, and Axelar, but we do have some preferences:

  • First, the bridge should be “trust-minimized” in the IBC style, such that only a quorum of a large validator set is trusted, where that validator set is constrained by proof-of-stake incentives and slashing for misbehaviour (as opposed to a bridge with a small, fixed multisignature).
  • Second, it should be possible for ZEC to flow across the bridge and then through the bridge to any IBC-enabled chain, in the permissionless sense of the IBC protocol.
  • Third, the bridge should integrate seamlessly with z-addresses. A fully private bridge in the near-term is probably infeasible since it would require substantial changes to the Zcash protocol (further context), but the bridge should make it as easy for users to use z-addresses when they are on the Zcash side as possible - specifically, it should allow users to send to a Zcash shielded address from the Namada side of the bridge, and to send from a Zcash shielded address to the Namada side.

Heliax has already published a rough architectural sketch for how such a bridge might look here, but a final design and implementation is subject to consensus among all the relevant stakeholders.

The Anoma Foundation would be happy to coordinate development of such a bridge directly, but we think it’d be even better if a third party with interest in both Namada and Zcash steps up to develop the bridge. For this reason, we plan to propose an initial RFP for a Zcash ↔ Namada bridge as part of the grants program described above, where funds would be paid out to any party or parties who implement a bridge between Namada and Zcash satisfying the above desiderata.

Economics of ZEC on Namada

So, if Zcash and Namada are bridged, what does that mean for Zcash users and ZEC holders? Namada aims to provide a sort of “proof-of-stake as-a-service” for Zcashers, such that ZEC can be used as a means of private payment on Namada similarly to how it is used with Zcash today, just instead with proof-of-stake. Zcashers can send ZEC to Namada, send private transactions there, and pay fees in ZEC - they don’t need to acquire any other asset. Using ZEC on Namada, Zcashers can benefit from Namada’s fast-finality BFT consensus system and modern proof-of-stake security, and they can also receive shielded set rewards. We think this is an appealing option because it makes whether or not to use proof-of-stake consensual for individual Zcashers - Zcashers can choose to use Namada or not, try out proof-of-stake for themselves, and collect information to inform future Zcash development paths, all without any proof-of-stake upgrade or economic changes to the Zcash blockchain itself.

Namada stakers, in turn, receive some ZEC in fees (for transactions on the Namada chain which pay fees in ZEC), which gives them both a reason to support Zcashers using ZEC on Namada and a reason to care about the Zcash network and ZEC asset themselves. Namada governance has the option to adjust ZEC shielded pool reward rates and the grants pool / Zcash Sustainability Fund contribution in correlation with ZEC usage on Namada in a win-win feedback cycle, further aligning the incentives of both networks (subject, of course, to what the Namada and Zcash communities decide).

Private bridge research collaborations

For privacy-conscious users and Zcashers, using the current sort of trust-minimized blockchain bridges - such as IBC - comes with an unfortunate trade-off: a loss of privacy. Even between internally private systems such as Zcash and Namada, the bridges themselves must be public in order to preserve autonomy: each side of the bridge needs to monitor the balance of the other side, to prevent inflation in the case of Byzantine behaviour. For a more detailed explanation, see this post. Preserving both privacy and autonomy will require clever protocol design, collaboration between bridge designers and cryptographers, and possibly relying on recent advances in cryptography such as FHE. We’re very interested in research & development collaboration on future private bridging systems for the mutual benefit of the Zcash and Namada communities. Privacy and autonomy are both essential for a free world, so now it is on us as protocol developers and cryptographers to find good ways to preserve both.

Proof-of-stake research collaborations

The Anoma Foundation understands that the Zcash community is considering a transition to proof-of-stake. We want to be clear that we are neutral on what the Zcash community should do - that’s up to Zcashers. As researchers and developers of proof-of-stake protocols, however, we would like to make our proof-of-stake research & implementation work available under mutually acceptable, standard open-source licenses and conduct presentations / answer questions as to whether or not this proof-of-stake work fits the Zcash community’s requirements (and what options are possible in the proof-of-stake design space). It’s up to the Zcash community to decide what approach makes sense, but we would like to make our work available and attempt to explain it clearly. If the Zcash community decides upon a path that incorporates some of our research or engineering work, we would be happy to collaborate with relevant entities directly to share designs or code. For an overview of some of the proof-of-stake design space options and our understanding of how they might or might not meet the Zcash community’s requirements, please see this video.

Questions for the Zcash community

Thanks for reading all the way through :sweat_smile: !

Namada hasn’t launched yet, and this is only a summary of our current understanding of the Namada & Zcash communities and a proposal for where we could both benefit from technical and operational collaboration. You’ll also notice that this proposal doesn’t detail exact amounts. Before committing to this plan, or to specific amounts, we would like to ask the Zcash community as to what y’all think! In particular, the Anoma Foundation seeks consent - we would never want to contribute to the ZSF, conduct airdrops, build a bridge etc. if the Zcash community doesn’t like this idea (for whatever reason) - we want to push areas of collaboration which the Zcash community is onboard with, and focus on those the community is most excited about. In that spirit, we have five questions for Zcashers:

  1. How do you feel about the Zcash Sustainability Fund proposal? Are you generally onboard with the idea of the Sustainability Fund in general, and if other chains such as Namada contribute to it, are you onboard with that?
  2. How do you feel about airdrops? Airdrops can feel spammy, but they can also be a good way to give back to the individuals who have supported Zcash by holding ZEC, and a good way to encourage community collaboration. Would you be onboard with an airdrop? Do you have any concerns?
  3. How do you feel about a Zcash ↔ Namada bridge? Are any particular features or aspects of the security model really important? Which other ecosystems or applications are you most excited about bridging ZEC to? Is anyone interested in implementing such a bridge (and receiving a sizeable bounty for doing so)?
  4. Who in the Zcash community might be interested in collaborating on private bridges research and proof-of-stake research?
  5. Who else in the Zcash community should we be talking to? Is there anywhere else Namada could help Zcash out that we’ve missed here?

We’d love to hear your feedback here on this thread (or by DM if you prefer). :beers:


My personal opinion: these proposals look exciting! I’m really curious how others in the ecosystem feel about them.

I intend to post in a bit about some of the technical dependencies and the teams working on relevant portions.

I really appreciate the collaborative spirit!

  1. I see the ZSF as a way of future-proofing Zcash funding. Who knows what the future holds but I do think it’ll include a ton of collaboration that may involve 3rd parties contributing ZEC and other new assets to the Zcash ecosystem. This is in spirit of the ZSF.
  2. No issue with Airdrops especially when it’s connected to valued work/contributions.
  3. I guess I have some homework to learn more about how the bridge works :slightly_smiling_face:. On the surface the bridge looks great :slightly_smiling_face:. I guess it opens up a few questions around ZSAs and wallet integration but overall positive :smiling_face:.
  4. I’ve always had an image in my mind that the best possible bridge in the medium term is one that is guaranteed with ZKPs submitted by the users into the bridge which can then be validated. Given Namada is circuits based I wonder if there is also some long term dream around this?
  5. I’ve always thought ZSF should have ZSAs baked into the core idea. Maybe reaching out to @aquietinvestor about what you’d like to contribute to the ZSF might help the community to more seriously consider how ZSAs fit into the ZSF mix and when we need to do that work.

It sounds promising! Collaboration is always productive, especially coming from someone who knows zcash and has been following it for a long time.


1.) I am onboard with ZSF. See: The Zcash Posterity Fund - #27 by dismad

2.) I support an airdrop but it should be done strategically. I would recommend users having to accomplish tasks to receive funds: think how to stake, how to send a shielded tx with private memo, watching quick video on UA’s , perform a bridged tx etc. They should be fun and also help educate about the two ecosystems. I also recommend the airdrops not be liquid initially, and slowly release the funds by some criteria the community can agree on.

3.) While IBC is my favorite Cosmos ecosystem technology, its necessarily not private yet, so I support the research of new types of bridges that will allow potential use of shielded collateral and or shielded assets. Having a way to connect Ethereum, Cosmos <=> Osmosis, and Zcash is, IMHO, super important.

4.) As a core contributor of ZecHub I am excited to help educate any research that is worked on in this area. We can help organize community calls or whatever is needed to get the ball rolling.

5.) I think your twitter thread and thoughts in this forum are great. Perhaps a discord voice meeting, or twitter spaces would also help.

Overall as a Zcash user/zolder and as a Cosmos ecosystem user/holder/staker I think this alliance is coming at a good time: More folks are getting curious about crypto in general and we want to make sure they have financial privacy and have fun exploring DEX’s, DeFi, and NFT’s .


[quote=“cwgoes, post:1, topic:44372”]

  • How do you feel about the Zcash Sustainability Fund proposal? Are you generally onboard with the idea of the Sustainability Fund in general, and if other chains such as Namada contribute to it, are you onboard with that?

Big fan of the fund proposal. Will help out with long term sustainability. This is critical for the success of any decentralized network, and it could help ensure the longevity of the Zcash network.

The proposal maintains the 21 million ZEC supply cap, which means that the Zcash network will not experience inflation. This is important for maintaining the value of ZEC as a digital asset.

This can also help stabilize the price of ZEC and reduce volatility, which is important for attracting investors and users.

**Potential for future developments: **

The ZPF proposal could be a beneficial precursor to three promising lines of development for ZEC, including improvements to transaction fee mechanisms, research into Proof-of-Stake (POS), and marketing to potential new users. These improvements could help make the Zcash network more efficient, secure, and user-friendly.

Independent from consensus protocol recommendations: The proposal is independent from PoS or any consensus protocol recommendations and could be adopted with the current PoW consensus protocol with the same benefits and drawbacks. This means that it is feasible to implement in the near future and does not require significant changes to the network’s underlying technology.

  • How do you feel about airdrops? Airdrops can feel spammy, but they can also be a good way to give back to the individuals who have supported Zcash by holding ZEC, and a good way to encourage community collaboration. Would you be onboard with an airdrop? Do you have any concerns?

Love airdrops. Airdrops can help to increase visibility and adoption, as people who receive them might be more likely to explore and use the cryptocurrency in question. It will be interested to see how many individuals auto sell them all though, which happens most times with airdrops. I have a feeling this could be a little different as $ZEC zodlers are the most diamond handed in the land.

  • How do you feel about a Zcash ↔ Namada bridge? Are any particular features or aspects of the security model really important? Which other ecosystems or applications are you most excited about bridging ZEC to? Is anyone interested in implementing such a bridge (and receiving a sizeable bounty for doing so)?

A Zcash ↔ Namada bridge could be a compelling proposition for users of both ecosystems. The ability to move assets between the two networks could enable new use cases and create new opportunities for collaboration and innovation.

I think there will be developers and teams interested in implementing a Zcash ↔ Namada bridge. My question is, could there be a significant bounty available as an incentive? Is that possible?

  • Love Thor :smiley:

I hope that cznft won’t be forgotten

1 Like

I support the idea behind the proposal. As there is currently no proposal to vote on, I don’t have any specific opinion on this. However, the ability of going PoS and keeping the maximum issuance of 21 million $ZEC is important to me.

I am in favor of an airdrop, especially those that give preference towards shielded $ZEC like the one mentioned above.

I’m excited about using my $ZEC in the interchain world. I hope the bridge will have great UX for users, like requiring only one transaction signed for $ZEC on Zcash to be $ZEC on Agoric, which is the IBC-enabled ecosystem that I’m really excited about. As a JS dev, I’m looking forward to building an Agoric dapp that adds another use case for $ZEC.

I think wallet teams are important stakeholders to ensure that any bridge solution will be usable or for any airdrop to be safe for end-users. So, I recommend that Namada should talk to both Ywallet and Zingo teams.


Absolutely positive about this strategic alliance!

  1. I am in favour of the Zcash Sustainability Fund proposal, and I love the idea of other projects contributing. This could certainly help to develop a broader ecosystem.
  2. Airdrops are a great tool to onboard people but they must be leveraged with care. I agree with @dismad , users should be doing some task before receiving the airdrop. I suggest using platform designed on purpose such as layer3.xyz or Zealy (where there is already a Zcash community, see Zealy - Join the movement) along with a Twitter campaign.
  3. A Zcash - Namada bridge could bring great value to both networks, absolutely in favour. Because of the interoperability of IBC the said bridge would enable DeFi for Zcash in a private environment, and not only thanks to the Cosmos ecosystem. The outlined architecture looks very interesting to me because it allows for shielded transfer.
    4 and 5. I think you should talk in the next couple of Zcash Arborist Calls or do a Twitter space as suggested by @dismad

The namada code base is explicitly labeled experimental. Does that mean that there have been no audits performed? And if that is the case do you not think it is something that should be mentioned?

Thanks all for the responses so far! I will go through a few of the more nuanced points next week and check out the schedule of Arborist calls, and we’ll plan for some sort of AMA. Just to clarify on a few points and questions of mine:

Yes! That’s part of the idea behind the grants pool - the first topic of the grants pool will be implementation of this bridge. Whether this is one RFC or perhaps sub-RFCs will depend on developer interest, but there should be a considerable incentive either way.

What is cznft? I’m not familiar with it (yet).

Namada’s MASP circuit has been audited by Inference AG - you can find the report here - and there are a few ongoing audits on other parts of the codebase (e.g. Informal Systems has been auditing Namada’s cubic proof-of-stake system). Still, I would personally consider the code experimental - and I agree with you that we should communicate this clearly. (I would also consider many live blockchains experimental, so my definition of “experimental” may not be the same as everyone’s). Where do you think we could communicate better?


No, don’t ask people to do “tasks” to receive the airdrop. The community as a whole has contributed to the devfund for so long, why do you want to inflict such a burden ? And btw, this Zealy looks scammy it’s definitely not affiliated with the Zcash community (for example, the Telegram link isn’t the real TG of the community).


cz-nft about : Cypherpunk Zero NFT - Cypherpunk Zero
opensea collection : https://opensea.io/collection/cypherpunk-zero

Namada :heart: Zcash

It’s a good question and without putting too much thought into how to make it sound really nice i think a blog post about an examination of the potential security ramifications of claiming your shielded Zcash on this other chain through this method would be good. I can’t speak to any of it because i don’t know. Maybe an analysis of how or what kind of things may potentially be leaked, edge cases and pro-active measures. I think balancing the excitement of the airdrop with a healthy reality-check of the potential (if only theoretical) pit falls gives everyone a greater level of informed consent about deciding to participate in the program.
I agree with the subjectivity of the experimental label but I think the part about the dragons helps to define an/the extent of that label somewhat w/o simply being redundant. Whether that dragon label is appropriate is obviously up to you and the other developers and if it’s there then I assume that it is. To me it reads that the user should exercise just a little bit more caution than normal and probably not use the program yet for anything that necessitates any real security.

1 Like

I agree with you that zodlers have already done enough by holding their ZEC but in my view it would be more for an educational purpose e.g. to better know Namada, Zcash, the collaboration ongoing etc…

Zealy, formerly Crew3, is one of the many platform offering this educational service, and I don’t think the linked profile it’s a scam, probably it is related to this minor grant.

@zec.will.save.us IMHO cz-nft doesn’t have much to do with the Namada- Zcash alliance, or do you have any idea on how it could be integrated into this collaboration?

I can definitively say that it’s not related to the proposal. The minor grant proposal is related to the ZecHub space on Zealy (formerly Crew3).

Yes, zealy.io/c/zcash is sus and definitely in breach of the trademark. The associated Twitter account twitter.com/CommunityZcash and Discord server Zcash Community is also new (and suspicious). cc @decentralistdan


id say look into experimenting with ycash as an active testnet for whatever you are looking to do with sapling for smoothest experience when things go live for zcash


I’ve been a Zcash hodler since 2017, but as I’ve mentioned elsewhere, most of my dev time has been spent building on Avalanche, and I haven’t been active in the community here until recently. I have done a good bit of thinking about connecting Zcash to other ecosystems however, so perhaps my non-typical perspective on this will add some value.

First, I think Namada is a great edition to Cosmos, especially with a strong Zcash connection. Like everyone else here, I believe, “Privacy is normal,” and should always be an option, on every platform. I believe that the path toward worldwide default acceptance of this principle will come through commercial adoption of zkp services for business applications, and this is why connections to modular platforms like Cosmos and Avalanche are so important, since these are the platforms on which business will want to build. Once both businesses and citizens are using privacy tech ubiquitously for normal purposes, governments will find it impossible to ban.

And businesses absolutely positively need zkp tech. This past Thursday, I was at an event in NYC hosted by BitGo, and the guests were all working in one way or another on transitioning ce-fi to de-fi. When I told them that I was working on connecting Avalanche and Zcash, I repeatedly heard, “ZKP tech is what we need.” There are so many business-to-business use-cases for zkp tech, it’s nuts, and, they told me, the senior decision-makers on Wall Street will not adopt crypto until privacy can be guaranteed. Why? Because that’s how they do business now, in privacy, not with their wallets wide open for anyone with a web browser to examine. They want to expose transactions to specific counterparties in a gradated manner, and this is where zkp tech shines.

So Namada is an important project imo, and I am glad to see with this post the strong desire to not just fork and modify Zcash on Cosmos but to connect the two ecosystems.

Second, regarding the proposed Zcash-Namada bridge, I have looked over your design goals and principles, and it’s reassuring to see that it would work almost exactly the same way as the Zcash-Avalanche bridge that we are proposing to build. Not only is it an indicator that we are probably all moving in the right direction in respect to bridge design, but it also means that the two projects could help each other advance. For instance, in our proposal, Deliverable 2.1 is a series of UML diagrams that will spec out the decentralized bridge in detail. This spec could then be repurposed to build the Zcash-Namada bridge that you propose, with adjustments. This excites me.

Third, regarding the proposed air drop, everyone likes free money, but I urge some caution. (Sorry, I can’t help but picture the Oprah meme!) While I admire what you’re trying to do—connect and reward the Zcash community—as you probably are already aware, a poorly designed airdrop can inflict self-harm if the people receiving the tokens are not otherwise bought-in to your project. If they all sell, your token price drops. A lot.

Avalanche actually did an amazingly good job distributing air dropped tokens when it launched. They didn’t call it an “air drop” though. Before mainnet launch, they did one final testnet launch, Denali, with over one thousand validators participating. I got to participate. We all had to keep a validator running for two weeks and do various tests and upgrades as they instructed, and if we did what they wanted, we would each receive 2000 AVAX which was worth about $1000 USD at the time. For the amount of time it took, it was generous but not outrageous compensation for the work required. But, that 2000 AVAX was locked for a year, and the only useful thing anyone could do with that AVAX for the next year was to stake it on a validator. So sure enough, nearly everyone who participated in Denali continued to validate the mainnet for the next year. But here’s the cool thing—after those tokens unlocked, nearly everyone kept validating. There was no sell-off, no drop in price. We were all firmly committed to participating in the new ecosystem.

So I recommend doing your air drop somewhat like this with the key elements of (1) something (even small) must be done to earn it, (2) the tokens are initially locked, and yet (3) they can be used for in-network tasks, like staking, even when locked.

Hope all that helps!


fyi: @ZcashGrants


LOL sorry then, I thought it was some genuine initiative. Should be reported to Zealy.

The snapshot date shouldn’t matter much because Zcashers do not have to do anything in advance anyways. Airdrop rates will be calibrated such that shielded ZEC receives slightly more than transparent ZEC (so there’s no time like the present to shield your ZEC :smile:).

One question to @cwgoes , how can Namada will be able to see the Zcash users shielded balance? In my (poor) knowledge it shouldn’t be possible unless the user disclose the viewing keys. Or are you planning to do some ZKP interactive tool to do that? Wouldn’t feel that safe to disclose to a third party.

1 Like

I second to this question, since I doubt that non-interactive shielded airdrop is possible.

1 Like