In many crypto systems, compliance is handled outside the blockchain. A company runs KYC checks, decides who is allowed in, and then uses the chain as a neutral pipe. That approach works until something goes wrong, and responsibility becomes unclear.
Dusk takes a different approach. It treats compliance as something that should be enforced by the system itself, not manually layered on later. Assets and smart contracts can be designed so rules about ownership, transferability, and disclosure are enforced automatically.
This doesn’t mean Dusk is anti-privacy. In fact, it’s the opposite. Privacy is preserved by default, while compliance is enforced through cryptographic proofs and rule-based logic. Oversight is possible when required, without exposing everyone’s data all the time.
This balance is important because regulated finance cannot function without rules, but it also cannot function under constant public exposure. Dusk is trying to prove that these two requirements don’t have to conflict — if the system is designed correctly from the start.
