ZCashNames — human-readable names for Unified Addresses, live on mainnet (fair launch, no pre-registration)

MOD Note: For clarification this appears to be a separate naming service from the ZNS at zcashnames.com which received a Zcash Community Grant

Unified Addresses solved a real problem, and created a smaller one. A
single-receiver Orchard address is 106 characters. Add a Sapling receiver and
it’s 178. Add a transparent one and it’s 213. Those are measured lengths from
our own test vectors, not estimates.

Nobody verifies a string like that. In practice people check the first four
characters and the last four — eight out of 213 — and hope the clipboard was
honest. ZCashNames replaces it with something you can actually read out loud:
bob.zcash.

It went live on mainnet today.

How a command reaches the protocol

Registering, updating, listing or buying a name is a single shielded ZCash
transaction sent to the protocol address. The amount is the payment and the
ZIP-302 memo is the signed command. Both in the same note.

That matters more than it sounds. Because intent and payment travel together,
they can’t be separated, reordered, or invented after the fact — and block
height, index within the block and input index give every command a
deterministic total order. There is no separate “reference number” step, and no
window where you’ve paid but the instruction is still in flight.

Why you don’t have to trust us

This is the part worth reading carefully, because it’s the part most name
services get to skip.

We publish the protocol address and its viewing key. With those, anyone can:

  1. scan the chain and recover every command ever issued, from genesis, in the
    exact order the blockchain fixed;
  2. replay them through the open-source indexer, which implements the same rules;
  3. compute the registry’s state root independently;
  4. compare it against the root anchored on-chain.

If we ever censored a paid command, invented a transfer, mis-credited a balance
or reordered history, every independent indexer computes a different root and
contradicts us — without permission, without asking, and without any special
access. The indexer ships as a Docker image; running one is a single command.

The state root is anchored with a zero-knowledge proof (SP1, Groth16) that the
transition rules were followed. To be clear about what that proof does and
doesn’t do: it lets the anchor contract accept a root without scanning ZCash
itself. It does not prove the inputs were the real chain command stream —
replication does that job, and does it better, because an indexer sees the
decrypted amount and memo while a circuit would only see a note commitment. The
anchor lives on BNB Smart Chain purely because anchoring needs to be cheap and
frequent; none of your data or funds go there.

The honest framing: this is fraud-evident, not fraud-preventing. A bad
batch could reach the chain and be contradicted afterwards. Nothing in the
design stops it being published in the first place. What the design guarantees
is that it cannot be hidden, and that you never needed our cooperation to find
out. We’d rather say that plainly than call it “trustless” and have you discover
the nuance later.

A fair start

  • No pre-registration. No waitlist, no invite codes, no referral ladder, no
    block of premium names reserved for insiders or investors. The registry opened
    empty and every unclaimed name goes to whoever asks first — where “first” is
    decided by block height and position, not by us.
  • No renewals. There is no expiry date in the protocol, no annual fee, no
    check-in window to miss. A name leaves your control only when you sign a
    command transferring or selling it. There is no mechanism — for us or anyone —
    to reclaim it.
  • No custody. Names bind to your Ed25519 key and every change is a command
    you sign. We never hold your keys and can’t move a name on your behalf.

Pricing

One-time, by name length, identical for every zone and every registrant — they
are protocol constants, not a policy we can quietly change per customer:

Length Register (once)
1 char 5.5 ZEC
2 4 ZEC
3 2.45 ZEC
4 1.2 ZEC
5 0.65 ZEC
6 0.35 ZEC
7+ 0.15 ZEC

Re-pointing a name at a different address later costs between 0.00025 and 0.006
ZEC, and you can do it as often as you like. Marketplace sales carry a flat 5%
service fee. Five zones are available: .zcash, .zec, .private, .secure,
.safe.

Labels are restricted to lowercase a–z, digits and hyphens — no Unicode, so
the homograph tricks that plague other naming systems aren’t possible here.

On privacy

Commands travel as shielded transactions, so amounts and addresses stay off the
public ledger. A name is a way for someone to reach you, not a window into your
balance or history — closer to publishing an email address than a bank
statement.

Roadmap

  • A names explorer (in development) — a block explorer shows transactions;
    this one shows names. Every registration, address change, ownership transfer,
    listing and sale as one searchable history, without running a node yourself.
  • Wallet integration (next) — see below.
  • Whatever you ask for. Past those two the roadmap is deliberately
    unwritten, and we’d rather it were shaped by this forum than by us guessing.

Wallet developers — we’d like to work with you

The point of a name is that you never touch the address. That’s only fully true
once the wallet resolves names itself. Resolution is a plain HTTP call to any
indexer — including one you run — and returns the target address with a Merkle
proof against the anchored root, so your users don’t have to trust our server
either.

If you build a ZCash wallet, we would much rather do this with you than around
you. Reach us at info@zcashnames.co and we’ll work to whatever shape suits
your codebase.

Links

Also reachable over Tor — the app and a public indexer, addresses in the docs.

Happy to answer anything, including the awkward questions. If you find a way to
make the registry disagree with itself, we’d genuinely like to hear about it.

1 Like

i was told as i had already paid for a name in zcash.me that i would get priority to claim it on zcash names , is this not so anymore ?

re
No pre-registration. No waitlist, no invite codes, no referral ladder, no
block of premium names reserved for insiders or investors. The registry opened
empty and every unclaimed name goes to whoever asks first — where “first” is
decided by block height and position, not by us.

Hi! If you’re talking about services which are in Beta for years, we are not that ones. I think you mixed up the naming services :wink:

you joined forces last i heard ?

You’re confusing us with someone else :man_shrugging:

1 Like

yeah i must be because i thought both were doing this together, so zcash names has nothing to do with this guy ? sorry for asking but i could of sworn it was a merge of the two, pretty sure there was a post also, ill check anyhow apologies if i got wires crossed

1 Like

zcashnames.com appears to be the main domain, whats this ? and whats your main official twitter acc @ ?

1 Like

So we will have two alternative name services with the same name and domain but a final “m”?

@alexxiy @craftsoldier wtf? :joy:

3 Likes

This seems cool, and my main concerns being:

  • Where do the funds go? Who keeps the 5.5 ZEC? Is it burned? Is it governed by a multisig, by a known consortium, like ENS’ Treasury?

  • Second, the issue here isn’t the integrity of the name. Wallets already download all blocks; they can look up the address themselves, so most won’t attempt to tamper regardless.

    The issue is that law enforcement agencies can monitor the NAT or RAM of an indexer and get the IP address of the person requesting an address, meaning they can track who sent the crypto and potentially use… not good tactics to extract the names of the people using this service.

A fix would be to use a Private Information Retrieval based system, such as the one made by @ValarGroup for the Zcash vote this coming cycle. Their system may be very well suited for this; I will explore if your indexer code can be made compatible with this.

Otherwise, good project!

3 Likes

You need to clarify your relationship to the original ZcashNames service in your OP @alexxiy

If there is none ( which I suspect is the case) then you must make that clear in your post.

EDIT: I have edited the OP for clarification.

Zcash.me and zcashnames.com are separate services from zcashnames.co

2 Likes

Thanks, @Shawn for editing, I was unavailable. That is right.
@strahncryptography I’ll give the answers today. Thanks for the feedback :+1:

Hello ZCash Community! :waving_hand:

I wanted to introduce myself and share a bit of the background behind ZCashNames.co.

I’ve been following ZCash closely since around 2017. As an experienced developer, I’ve had the opportunity to contribute to several crypto projects over the years - including building and actively maintaining Nodus, a small utility for the ZCash ecosystem.

With ZCashNames.co, my goal is to make another meaningful contribution to our ecosystem. You might wonder why I haven’t applied for community grants or funding: simply put, I don’t feel it’s right to ask for a grant on a project designed to generate revenue. I’d much rather pour my time and energy directly into building a great product than spending weeks chasing funding applications.

Beyond self-funding, I want to make sure the project gives back: I am committing a percentage of the service’s revenue to existing ZCash community initiatives, creation the new ones, or potentially using it to launch new community projects in the future.

What Makes Us Different?

Our core philosophy is simple: a genuinely fair start.

  • No waitlists
  • No insider early access
  • Equal opportunity for everyone

From day one, everyone has the exact same chance to secure their desired name.

I’m thrilled to keep building for this community and look forward to hearing your thoughts as we launch!

Have you already talked to community members, such as @ZCG board members or from existing companies?
Further, what “percent”? Clarify it. If the service is live now but the fund usage is “potentially”… it’s not good.

Fully agree with you! But in case if I would have asked any grants or funding for that :wink:
I’ll available in a few hours to answer all the remaining questions.

i would love some tech security checks on this first just to make sure its not here today gone tomorrow , sounds good but needs some security assurances, no twitter acc linked on main site ?

1 Like

Which website are you promoting here, zcash.me, zcashnames.com, or zcashnames.co? And when you say no waitlist, can I buy a usable human readable name today, and start using it? Or is this just an idea for now?

1 Like

There is one group that runs zcash (.me) and zcashnames (.com) , this other group is trying to sell a similar service using an almost identical URL zcashnames (.co)

IMHO this is a questionable move designed to be confusing, which judging by the comments here, is exactly what’s happening.

5 Likes

Hey everyone! After a busy day I’m here to answer your questions. :crossed_fingers:

First of all, the ones who who wished to audit things, I forgot to update on docs.zecnames.co the right data like Project’s genesis block, addresses and etc. Now Docs are fully aligned with the production project’s data.

@jenkin First of all, thanks for your support not only in word but also in deed :wink: . I saw you’ve got your Name :+1:

@strahncryptography

Where do the funds go?

They are go to our cold storage. Then will be distributed according the projects needs and rules (on which we’re thinking about.
Here is the tentative plan:

  • expences for hardware, devs
  • personal backup funds
  • donation for existing community initiatives
  • creating new community initiatives
  • other

I understand, that the metter here is only in trust. For many of you I’m just no-name appeared here. And honestly I don’t know how to prove you anything.

Second, the issue here isn’t the integrity of the name. Wallets already download all blocks; they can look up the address themselves, so most won’t attempt to tamper regardless.

The issue is that law enforcement agencies can monitor the NAT or RAM of an indexer and get the IP address of the person requesting an address, meaning they can track who sent the crypto and potentially use… not good tactics to extract the names of the people using this service.

Good point. That’s already covered. If you’ve took a look into the Docs, there’s already Tor availability of the website and Indexer. ​Furthermore, anyone can spin up their own Indexer. Everything is open-source, the protocol is code-proofed. Nobody should rely on our Indexer, they should (sometimes even must) start their own! :wink:

Have you already talked to community members, such as @ZCG board members or from existing companies?

Not yet, and I’m personally always prefer to show what’s done first before asking any grants. And since the project aims to generate profit I think it’s not right to ask for any grants and funding.

@Zecoshi

i would love some tech security checks on this first just to make sure its not here today gone tomorrow , sounds good but needs some security assurances, no twitter acc linked on main site ?

Is Twitter acc a mandatory thing for anything? If yes, I will create one :wink:
About trust I’ve already told below, I think this covers your question at least partially.
Any security checks and feedback is appreciated :+1:

@Shawn

There is one group that runs zcash (.me) and zcashnames (.com) , this other group is trying to sell a similar service using an almost identical URL zcashnames (.co)

Yes, the situation turned out to be -to put it mildly- complicated. I don’t want to offend anyone, but I’ve seen plenty of projects that stay in beta for ages without ever actually launching. That’s why I assumed this was just another abandoned project.
However, I’m free to change the Project’s Name to avoid confusing people if it’s required.

Thanks for your feedback, I appreciate it!
If I haven’t fully answered your questions, feel free to ask any (like any you want!).

Soon I’ll update my main website alexxiy.top (at the moment there’s nothing yet) where I’ll introduce myself and the main projects I worked on in my life so you will know me more.

Everything is open-source, the protocol is code-proofed. Nobody should rely on our Indexer, they should (sometimes even must) start their own!

… Then there is absolutely zero reason for someone to use your name registry, is there? The ONE thing a name service is supposed to offer is lightweight and fast availability.

That’s why I suggested PIR. If the user is the one paying you to merely put a nullifier on the chain, and the user is the one who has the sync the full blockchain to retrieve who has what name, and the user is the one who is supposed to then verify that the names are correct, then what is the point of sending your team 5.5 ZEC?

For a spot on a fancy webpage? It makes no fiscal or common sense, make it make sense.

They are go to our cold storage. Then will be distributed according the projects needs and rules (on which we’re thinking about.
Here is the tentative plan:

  • expences for hardware, devs
  • personal backup funds
  • donation for existing community initiatives
  • creating new community initiatives
  • other

“Our” Who is “we”? What are their public identities? Is the address a proper multi-signature wallet? Who bears accountability for misused funds or embezzlement?

You explicitly position the fee as something that is intended to create a deflationary effect, not as a standard fee charged by your service. It only makes sense that the funds be managed by a DAO with accountability then, since the user expects that their funds would only serve a deflationary purpose and not a premium for a shorter name, which costs you nothing to manufacture.

Funnily, this is the antithesis of what Bitcoin (and by extension, Zerocoin/Zcash) was made for. To prevent people from just putting numbers in a database and calling it value.

So clarify: is the 5.5 ZEC a deflationary/scarcity enforcement in good faith, or is it just a money grab based on perceived rarity?