@MidnightNetwork is used for airdrop against witches, which is actually quite easy.
The project team is most afraid of two things. One is the reward pool being emptied by studios. The other is the misidentification of real people.
Many projects now screen lists, basically needing to check wallets thoroughly.
Transfer relationships, interaction paths, funding rhythms, all need to be examined closely.
The list has been created, and users have also been mostly scrutinized. The problem is not in screening but in the method of screening being too coarse.
The technology of @MidnightNetwork just happens to be able to break this step down in detail.
It itself is designed to use zero-knowledge proofs and selective disclosure to achieve verifiable privacy, and what needs to be verified on-chain is the result, not necessarily all underlying data.
When applied to the airdrop scenario, the project team can write the rules as a privacy smart contract for @MidnightNetwork .
For instance, how long has a user been continuously active, is the interaction depth sufficient, do behaviors resemble batch scripts, these conditions can all be written into the rules first.
Users generate proofs locally, only submitting the fact that they meet the criteria for verification on-chain, without handing over their entire wallet history.
What is seen on-chain is whether this address meets the conditions, or if this address poses too high a risk, rather than laying bare everything that has been done over the past few years.
Compact language was originally prepared for this kind of contract writing, allowing public ledgers, zero-knowledge circuits, and local offline logic to work together.
This kind of list isn't just screened once and done.
Qualifications will be re-verified, rewards will be distributed in batches, and the system needs to keep running. $NIGHT is a public native governance token, DUST is generated by $NIGHT , and what consumes during actual transactions and contracts is DUST.
If the project team runs this kind of screening system long-term, the budget will be easier to control than a single-token gas model.
By doing this, the project team can distribute rewards more accurately to real people, and users do not need to expose their entire on-chain life to prove they are not witches.