Repository navigation
fix(faq): correct Aztec privacy-model classification - #50
Closed
arunimshukla wants to merge 1 commit into
Closed
arunimshukla wants to merge 1 commit into
arunimshukla wants to merge 1 commit into
Conversation
rymnc
pushed a commit
that referenced
this pull request
Oct 14, 2026
Mirror of [#50](#50) by @arunimshukla, with original commit authorship preserved ([5f2c35d](5f2c35d)). Corrects the "UTXO vs account model" FAQ: Aztec uses a hybrid model (private state is UTXO-style notes, commitments and nullifiers; public contract state is separate and transparent), not account-based privacy. The FHE comparison now applies to "some FHE-based confidential-token designs". Sources cited in the original PR: - https://docs.aztec.network/developers/docs/foundational-topics/state_management - https://docs.aztec.network/developers/docs/aztec-nr/framework-description/state_variables Excludes `tests/faq-content.test.ts` from the original PR, as requested. Prompted by: @rymnc Co-authored-by: Arunim Shukla <54760103+arunimshukla@users.noreply.github.com>
Member
|
thank you for your contribution! included on main in 638a7a1 |
This file contains hidden or bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
2 participants
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
What I found
I found that the “UTXO vs account model” FAQ groups Aztec under account-based privacy. Aztec instead uses a hybrid model: private state uses UTXO-style notes, commitments and nullifiers, while public contract state is separate and transparent.
I verified the distinction against Aztec’s official documentation:
What I changed
I corrected the two-paragraph answer to describe Aztec’s hybrid architecture. I also qualified the FHE comparison as applying to some FHE-based confidential-token designs, which retain an account-style balance model through encrypted mappings.
The answer now frames the choice around threat model, composability, trust assumptions and deployment environment.
The diff contains only the FAQ answer and its focused regression test.
Reproduction
On unpatched
main(91c6c257), the regression fails because the answer containsAccount-based privacy (Aztec, FHE-based)and does not describe Aztec’s private state as note-based. The same test passes with this patch.Verification
I validated both revisions using the same pinned content submodule,
facbe021.npm ci— passednpm run build:graph— passed; 154 nodes, 1,042 edges and 74 glossary termsnpm test— 63/63 tests passednpm run lint:refs— passednpm run build— passedgit diff --check— passednpm run check— identical baseline diagnostics: 63 existing errors, 0 warnings and 160 hints; no new diagnosticsThe branch is one commit ahead and zero behind the verified upstream base.