Arkham Announces 'De-anonymization' of ZCash. Which Transactions Are Being Tracked

RBK-cryptoPublished on 2025-12-09Last updated on 2025-12-09

Abstract

Analytics platform Arkham Intelligence has announced it has begun "de-anonymizing" transactions of the privacy-focused cryptocurrency Zcash (ZEC). Arkham claims to have labeled over half (53%) of all ZEC transactions, including both private (shielded) and public ones, and has linked $420 billion worth of ZEC to specific individuals and entities. Its monitoring tools provide alerts for large transactions and use AI for analysis. As an example, Arkham highlighted that the U.S. government holds $1.26 million in ZEC, confiscated from AlphaBay founder Alexander Cazes eight years ago. Zcash creator Zooko Wilcox responded by stating the announcement is not true de-anonymization, as ZEC users themselves choose whether to make their transactions visible on such a dashboard. The news comes amid a significant price surge for ZEC, which has increased nearly tenfold since the start of the year. Wilcox admitted he does not know the reason for the price increase but dismissed theories of a "coordinated pump" as cynical propaganda. Zcash supporters argue that Arkham's labeling is primarily based on data from the public portion of the network, though Arkham asserts it used methods to correlate some activity from the private pool as well.

Analytics platform Arkham has announced that it has started 'de-anonymizing' transactions in the Zcash cryptocurrency. This coin is known for allowing users to choose between private or public transaction processing.

Arkham claims to have labeled more than half (53%) of the transactions in the Zcash network, both shielded and open. Analysts have linked $420 billion in ZEC to specific individuals and organizations. Arkham's features for monitoring Zcash activity include the ability to receive notifications about large transactions, as well as analyze operations using artificial intelligence.

As an example of Zcash monitoring, Arkham pointed out that eight years ago, the US government confiscated $737,000 in ZEC from AlphaBay founder Alexander Cazes, which has appreciated in value over the years. The US government's balance now holds $1.26 million in ZEC.

Zcash creator Zooko Wilcox stated that this is not de-anonymization in the full sense, as ZEC users themselves decide whether their operations will be visible.

"The Arkham headline makes it sound like they can 'de-anonymize' Zcash owners. But in reality, when you use Zcash, you choose for yourself whether one of your wallets will be displayed on their dashboard or not," Wilcox wrote.

This fall, after almost five years of dormancy, the price of ZEC has increased nearly tenfold since the beginning of the year. Such a sharp spike has caused a lively reaction in the crypto community, dividing it into two camps: some believe the growth is a natural revaluation of the project's fundamental characteristics, while others see it as the result of a large-scale and coordinated promotional campaign.

At the end of October, Wilcox admitted that he did not know why ZEC was rising so much in price or if it would fall back. "But here's what I do know: the talk about this being a 'coordinated pump' is just more propaganda from people who can't believe in something good and genuine," the ZEC founder wrote.

Zcash supporters on social media also claim that the main part of Arkham's labeling is based on data from the open part of the network. The company itself assures that it used methods to correlate some activity from the private pool as well.

As of 12:40 Moscow time, Zcash is trading around $410. Over the past 24 hours, the coin has appreciated by 4.5%, and over the year by 543%.

Tether has invested in humanoid robots. When will they be launched

Binance suspends employee for insider trading. What happened

Strategy purchased the largest batch of bitcoins since July

Related Reads

The Niche Consensus Among Elites: Has College Become an Expensive Waste?

**Summary:** A growing "anti-college" movement is gaining traction among elite circles in Silicon Valley, challenging the traditional value of a four-year university degree. Proponents argue that college has become an expensive, slow, and increasingly irrelevant waste of time, especially in the fast-paced tech world where opportunities pass by quickly. The movement is led by figures like billionaire Peter Thiel, who criticizes universities for high costs, ideological indoctrination, and stifling true innovation. His "Thiel Fellowship" pays young people to drop out and pursue ventures. Companies like Palantir Technologies (co-founded by Thiel) fuel this trend with programs like the "Meritocracy Fellowship," which offers high school graduates paid internships as an alternative to immediate college enrollment, promising a practical "Palantir Degree." Key drivers include: 1. **Economics:** Skyrocketing student debt versus the allure of immediate, high-paying tech jobs or startup funding. 2. **Technology:** AI and online tools lowering barriers to self-education and product development, making formal instruction seem inefficient. 3. **Culture:** A backlash against perceived "woke" ideology and DEI policies in universities, coupled with a belief that these institutions suppress meritocracy and masculine drive. The movement is notably male-dominated. Critics, like economist David Deming, warn against overgeneralizing from dropout success stories (survivorship bias). He emphasizes that genuine autodidacts are rare, corporate training is narrowly focused, and the "college wage premium" remains high for most people. University liberal arts education, he argues, builds adaptable problem-solving skills and broad perspectives. The debate highlights a deeper crisis in education. The core model of the modern university appears increasingly mismatched with the speed of the information age. The movement signals a shift in the locus of learning from institutional "education" to personal, active "learning" powered by the internet and AI. Ultimately, this may not mean the end of university, but rather a painful evolution. The future likely holds more hybrid, personalized, and lifelong learning pathways. The central question becomes: in a world changing faster than any curriculum, how do we best learn?

marsbit15m ago

The Niche Consensus Among Elites: Has College Become an Expensive Waste?

marsbit15m ago

From Subsidies to Token-Based Pricing to Price Cuts: Is OpenAI Sparking a Price War? Is the Inflection Point for Token Economics Nearing?

The commercialization of generative AI is facing a critical inflection point as a potential price war looms. According to The Wall Street Journal, OpenAI is considering a significant cut to its token fees to compete with rival Anthropic, signaling a shift from a growth-at-all-costs model focused on token consumption. This move comes as both companies, reportedly losing billions on compute, prepare for IPOs, and as enterprise customers face "bill shock" from switching to usage-based token billing. Reports indicate poor ROI, with one analysis finding only 18 cents of every dollar spent on AI tokens generates user-facing value. The industry's initial phases—from flat-rate subscriptions to aggressive subsidies—have given way to a reckoning with real costs. Analysts debate the future: some predict a bifurcation between premium, high-cost models for complex tasks and cheaper alternatives for routine work, while others believe overall spending will still rise as agentic AI increases tokens per task. Notably, Chinese model DeepSeek's low-cost API is gaining traction with U.S. enterprises, adding competitive pressure. The core challenge is redefining value beyond token volume ("tokenmaxxing") toward measurable productivity ("valuemaxxing"), as the entire AI value chain, from cloud providers to chipmakers, feels the ripple effects of unsustainable pricing.

marsbit19m ago

From Subsidies to Token-Based Pricing to Price Cuts: Is OpenAI Sparking a Price War? Is the Inflection Point for Token Economics Nearing?

marsbit19m ago

Trading

Spot
Futures
活动图片