I first ran into the RWA “privacy problem” the boring way: reading an offering memo side-by-side with an on-chain explorer and realizing the two worlds don’t reconcile. The chain is clean and public. The paperwork is private and messy. And the gap between them is where trust gets expensive.

Tokenizing a building, a fund, or a note isn’t hard because you can’t mint a token. It’s hard because regulated assets carry rules that must be enforced (who can hold, when it can move, what disclosures apply) while the underlying details often cannot be broadcast. Public ledgers are great at showing everything, and that’s exactly what regulated commerce often can’t do.The closest real-world analogy I use is a locked shipping container that still has to pass customs: nobody wants the contents spilled on the street, but the inspector needs a reliable way to confirm it meets the rules.

Dusk’s approach is to make “customs” a native property of the network. The default state is confidentiality: balances, transfers, and contract state can be shielded, but still checked against public policy. Under the hood, one implementation detail is the committee-based proof-of-stake consensus (Succinct Attestation) designed for fast, deterministic finality useful if your asset transfer is supposed to settle, not linger in probabilistic limbo.

Execution is split from settlement, and the stack supports different environments. Another implementation detail is the ZK-friendly Dusk VM (WASM/Wasmtime-based) built to run privacy-focused contracts and support ZK operations in the runtime itself.  In plain English: you keep the sensitive bits encrypted, then attach a succinct proof that the private action complied with a public rule (eligibility, limits, lockups), without dumping investor identities or deal terms onto the ledger.

@Dusk #Dusk $DUSK