Episode
Why is the SEC Concerned about Privacy now?
- Published
- Nov 23, 2025
- Duration seconds
- 3778
- Processing state
not_requested
Actions
POST https://stenobird.com/v1/public/podcasts/epicenter-learn-about-crypto-blockchain-ethereum-bitcoin-and-distributed-technologies-918755/episodes/why-is-the-sec-concerned-about-privacy-now/transcription-requests
Idempotently request low-priority transcript generation for this episode.GET https://stenobird.com/podcast/epicenter-learn-about-crypto-blockchain-ethereum-bitcoin-and-distributed-technologies-918755/why-is-the-sec-concerned-about-privacy-now.md
Read the agent-friendly Markdown representation of this episode resource.
Summary
At DevConnect 2025, Sebastian and Friederike speak with Peter Van Valkenburgh about the rapidly evolving battle for digital rights. Peter challenges the industry's comfort with transparency, arguing that "transparency will destroy neutrality." He uses the history of SWIFT to illustrate how a once-neutral messaging system was captured by geopolitical interests because it wasn't "technically blind" to the data it processed. He argues that for blockchains to survive as global settlement layers, they must be "actually blind" to transactions, making neutrality a technical reality rather than a policy choice. The conversation turns to the aggressive legal tactics currently deployed against developers. Peter highlights the Pereira Bueno case, where prosecutors charged MEV searchers with wire fraud for being "dishonest validators" a concept Peter argues completely undermines the game-theoretic security of permissionless networks. He also breaks down the mixed bag of Tornado Cash litigation. While the sanctions against the protocol were successfully challenged and invalidated for Americans, the criminal conviction of developer Roman Storm for "unlicensed money transmission" sets a terrifying precedent for anyone publishing open-source code. On a constructive note, Peter introduces Coin Center's "John Hancock Project," which advocates for replacing the current, ineffective KYC/AML regime (which seizes less than 1% of illicit funds) with a system based on privacy-preserving attestations and self-sovereign risk scores. Finally, Peter shares surprising optimism regarding the US Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC). He notes that under the influence of Commissioners Hester Peirce and Paul Atkins, the agency has shifted from an aggressive adversary to a potential ally, openly dis…