Vitalik questions the privacy policy of the X platform: forcing the disclosure of user countries/regions has damaged the anonymity of the crypto community

(Previous summary: The Ethereum Foundation established a "Privacy Research Group" to promote six major roadmaps and fully launch competition on the privacy track)
(Background supplement: Privacy coins welcome the general rise! A word from Silicon Valley investor Naval Ravikant caused Zcash to soar 200% in ten days)

Contents of this article

On this weekend in November 2025, Elon Musk Its X platform suddenly added a "country/region" tag to all user files. Originally positioned as a function to improve the authenticity of information, it has caused a shock in the cryptocurrency community: developers, whales and dissidents are worried that this behavior is tantamount to exposing themselves to violent extortion and government surveillance.

The starting point of the conflict: small icon, big storm

X platform product director Nikita Bier explained that this move is in response to the Trump administration’s policy needs to “prevent foreign disinformation” and ensure the integrity of the speech field. However, the encryption community believes that this approach of "first revealing and then letting users find ways to hide" completely violates the basic principle that network security should be "closed by default." Uniswap founder Hayden Adams harshly criticized: "Voluntary disclosure is a choice, forced disclosure is insanity."

A more representative voice of opposition came from Ethereum co-founder Vitalik Buterin. He remained on the sidelines for a time, but after deep thought, he publicly stated:

"This is a retroactive divestment of users' privacy rights."

In his view, the platform's direct changes to user profile settings are equivalent to the project side taking away liquidity, and the anonymity protection established over many years is instantly broken.

The real fear of the "$5 wrench attack"

Why is the blockchain community highly sensitive to this? The answer lies in the industry's slang term "$5 wrench attack." The attacker does not need to crack the encryption algorithm. As long as he knows where the currency holder is, he can use the most primitive violence to force the other party to hand over the private key. History has already left many cases of high-net-worth cryptocurrency individuals being kidnapped or extorted. Even if

Buterin stressed that for dissidents in oppressive regimes, a few clues to their location can lead to deadly pursuits. Summer.fi Chief Technical Officer Andrei David also reminded that users do not have tools to protect themselves, but the process of "exposure first, remediation later" is still essentially the most unfriendly to law-abiding users.

Technical Gap: It cannot stop the bad guys, but only hurts the good guys

Ironically, cyber soldiers and robots who are skilled in operating VPNs and springboard servers can easily fake their location; those who are really locked out are often ordinary engineers or investors who use services under their real names and real IPs. This controversy once again highlights the conflict between the governance philosophies of Web2 and Web3: the former prefers centralized decision-making, while the latter regards anonymity as an asset.

In the face of criticism, For many people, this is a missed opportunity to protect their personal safety.

The tug-of-war over digital sovereignty continues

In an atmosphere where the Trump administration emphasizes borders and identity, Silicon Valley companies are facing unprecedented compliance pressure, and the crypto community views the incident as a symbol of the platform's "anti-globalization." Venture capitalist Nic Carter and others support limited de-anonymization to maintain election integrity, but more developers believe that if the platform continues to push it, it will accelerate the community's migration to a decentralized social protocol.

While Web3 strives to create a permissionless world, Web2 raises the boundaries of information. This conflict between X and the crypto community reminds us that privacy is no longer the default, but an expensive resource that needs to be actively fought for. The choice remains before users—accept forced transparency or move conversations and assets to more decentralized venues.