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

Dragonfly Partner Haseeb: The Fastest-Growing Companies of the Future May All Get Stuck at 149 Employees

Dragonfly partner Haseeb explores the distorted economics of AI model pricing, drawing parallels to tax policy. He notes that startups and small teams (under 150 users) enjoy heavily subsidized, fixed-price AI subscriptions (like Claude Code), where the marginal cost of an additional token is effectively zero. This creates a powerful incentive for them to maximize token usage ("token-maxxing") and innovate aggressively with AI automation. In contrast, large enterprises (over 150 users) are forced onto "Enterprise" plans, paying per-token API fees with high (~75%) markups. This acts like a steep "tax" on AI-powered labor, disincentivizing marginal automation and experimental use, and encouraging them to retain more human workers. Haseeb argues this pricing creates a "150-person cliff," a regulatory notch similar to labor laws in France that discourage firms from growing past 50 employees. He predicts the fastest-growing future companies may deliberately cap their headcount at 149 to avoid the punitive enterprise pricing. This would foster an "AI-first" management philosophy obsessed with automation and outsourcing to stay lean. While not intentionally designed, this bifurcated pricing could become one of the most influential de facto tax policies, shaping how AI replaces labor—not through mass layoffs at big firms, but through agile, AI-native startups outcompeting them.

marsbit4m ago

Dragonfly Partner Haseeb: The Fastest-Growing Companies of the Future May All Get Stuck at 149 Employees

marsbit4m ago

How xBubble Breaks Through in the VC-Heavily-Backed OPC Economy

xBubble: Addressing the Structural Gap in the VC-Backed OPC Economy The concept of OPC (One Person Company) is evolving from a buzzword to a significant AI-driven market. While AI coding tools like Replit and Lovable have validated demand from non-technical users wanting to build applications, a key gap remains: the leap from creating a demo to running a stable, evolving business. These tools still require users to manage the development process, including technical judgments for integrations, modifications, and deployments—a major hurdle for OPCs. xBubble, by DAPPOS, tackles this by shifting from "Prompt-to-Code" to "SOP-to-Business." Instead of generating code from instructions, its core is a system of pre-organized SOPs (Standard Operating Procedures) that translate business goals—like "sell World Cup merchandise"—into complete, executable workflows. This includes generating cohesive assets, pages, payment systems, and backend logic. The platform is augmented by a network of third-party service providers who handle infrastructure (hosting, domains, payment setup), acting like "on-site service engineers." Users can pay for these services directly with xBubble credits, simplifying onboarding. This ecosystem aims to deliver not just an app, but a complete, modifiable business launch path. xBubble targets a clear OPC segment: small commercial nodes (e.g., creators, merchants) with existing products, customers, or channels, but for whom a full tech team is unjustifiable. Its potential lies in SOPs accumulating expertise from real cases, improving reliability and reducing delivery costs over time. Additionally, its native support for crypto payments caters to global or digital-native OPCs. In summary, as AI democratizes software creation, xBubble's opportunity is to prove that "SOP-to-Business" provides more immediate value for launching a real, operational business than a powerful but unstructured AI coding tool.

链捕手6m ago

How xBubble Breaks Through in the VC-Heavily-Backed OPC Economy

链捕手6m ago

If It's Not a Clear Yes, It's a No: A Nine-Year Retrospective by a VC Who Survived Four Cycles

**"Invest Only When Certain": A Nine-Year Retrospective from a VC Across Four Cycles** IOSG founder Jocy shares hard-earned lessons from nine years and over a hundred investments in Web3. The core challenge isn't identifying successful founders, but understanding why talented founders with solid ideas still fail. Through building a "failed founder database," IOSG identified six recurring failure patterns. **Founder Trait Red Flags:** 1. **Emotionally Unstable:** Founders who react defensively to criticism or publicly lash out under pressure (e.g., 80% drawdowns) often fail. Resilience is key. 2. **Lacking Hunger / Having a Fallback:** Founders with significant safety nets (family wealth, cushy fallback jobs) may lack the "do-or-die" commitment needed to survive crypto's brutal cycles. 3. **Unchecked Ego:** Includes "polished execution machines" who excel in known frameworks but struggle when paradigms shift, and "professor-types" who are technically brilliant but resistant to commercial feedback or coaching. **Project Structure Red Flags:** 4. **Token-First, Not Product-First:** Treating the token solely as a fundraising tool with no real utility or connection to product value is a major warning sign. The project should have value even if the token goes to zero. 5. **No Day-1 Exit Thesis:** Founders must have a clear, staged capital strategy from the start, understanding what each funding round needs to prove to unlock the next. "Exit before entry" is crucial. 6. **No Full-Cycle Experience:** Founders who haven't lived through a complete crypto bull/bear cycle (e.g., 2018, 2022) often underestimate their vulnerability. IOSG limits initial checks for such teams to $250k, sizing for risk. **The Positive Flipside: Desirable Founder Traits** The ideal candidate exhibits: obsessive problem-depth, being a second-time founder with a non-consensus vision, strong communication skills with *controlled* ego, relentless perseverance, and a global perspective with agency and taste (increasingly vital in the AI era). **Three Survival Tips for Founders:** 1. **Cash Flow Over Narrative:** Real revenue is what sustains projects, not vanity metrics. 2. **Tokens Are a Liability:** Avoid issuing a token unless absolutely necessary. The hidden costs (market making, liquidity, compliance) are immense, often a multi-million-dollar burden. 3. **Respect Liquidity:** Sell during peaks to build treasury, buy back to support the protocol during troughs. Be realistic about valuations and your ability to deliver for the next round. The final principle is simple yet paramount: **"If it's a borderline 'yes' or 'no,' don't invest."** In an industry that reinvents itself every few years, the discipline to consistently say "no" is the ultimate secret to longevity.

Foresight News32m ago

If It's Not a Clear Yes, It's a No: A Nine-Year Retrospective by a VC Who Survived Four Cycles

Foresight News32m ago

Trading

Spot
Futures
活动图片