As Web3 continues its evolution, one thing has become abundantly clear - privacy is a necessity. From protecting user data to complying with shifting global regulations, developers are searching for tools that balance transparency and confidentiality. But the available choices for private computation are diverse, each with its trade-offs.
Zero-Knowledge Proofs (ZK), Fully Homomorphic Encryption (FHE), and Trusted Execution Environments (TEE) have long been considered the holy trinity of privacy-enhancing technologies. Enter COTI V2, which introduces Garbled Circuits and MPC as a new, developer-friendly alternative that emphasizes compliance and usability without compromising on cryptographic rigor.
Which of these technologies offers the most practical path forward for developers building real-world dApps with privacy at the core? Let’s take a closer look.
A Quick Overview of the Players
ZK Proofs
Zero-Knowledge Proofs allow one party to prove a statement without revealing the underlying data. They're great for proofs of identity, solvency, and rollup verification. Protocols like zkSync, StarkNet, and Mina Protocol are pioneering this space.
FHE
Fully Homomorphic Encryption enables computation directly on encrypted data. It’s theoretically perfect you never need to decrypt but today, FHE remains too slow for practical deployment in most real-time applications.
TEE
Trusted Execution Environments (like Intel SGX) allow code to execute in isolated hardware environments. TEEs are fast and effective, but rely on centralized, manufacturer-controlled trust assumptions.
COTI (MPC + Garbled Circuits)
COTI V2 introduces an innovative EVM-compatible privacy layer using Garbled Circuits and secure Multi-Party Computation (MPC). This cryptographic method allows encrypted smart contract execution while enabling developers to add jurisdiction-aware compliance logic.
COTI's Secret Sauce – Garbled Circuits & MPC
COTI leverages Garbled Circuits in conjunction with MPC to execute encrypted smart contracts natively. This is not a privacy overlay COTI’s L2 was designed from the ground up to support private computation.
Performance: COTI achieves up to 1,000 TPS for native transactions and ~40 TPS for encrypted smart contracts, outperforming most ZK and FHE systems in practical scenarios.
Compliance-aware design: Developers can embed logic to restrict or tailor contract functionality based on geography, KYC status, or regulatory requirements.
Standard Solidity: Developers can write encrypted contracts using Solidity, avoiding the need for custom DSLs.
ZK – Elegant but Narrow
ZK is exceptional for succinct proofs and has enabled innovations like zkRollups, which allow scalable L2s. But:
-
General-purpose computation using ZK is complex, requiring developers to master tools like Circom, Halo2, or Noir.
-
Circuit generation is time-consuming and compiling even simple logic can take hours.
-
Reusability is limited compared to typical EVM smart contracts.
ZK remains an essential building block for verification tasks, but less ideal for building full-scale encrypted dApps today.
FHE – The Dream That’s Still a Dream
FHE allows computation on encrypted data without decryption. That makes it perfect in theory. In practice:
1.Current FHE schemes (e.g., CKKS, BFV) are slower than plaintext computation.
2. FHE compilers and toolkits are still in infancy, making integration hard.
3. Use cases like FHE-based machine learning remain highly experimental.
FHE is a promising area of cryptographic research, but it's not yet ready for widespread dApp deployment.
TEE – Centralized Trust in a Decentralized World
TEEs have been used in blockchain (e.g., Secret Network, Oasis) to enable private computation. Their advantages include:
-
Low latency execution
-
Production-ready toolkits
However:
-
TEEs rely on trusted manufacturers (e.g., Intel or AMD), creating a central point of trust.
-
Hardware vulnerabilities (like Spectre or Foreshadow) raise concerns.
-
Geopolitical and regulatory controls can limit TEEs' decentralized appeal.
COTI avoids these concerns by relying entirely on cryptography, not hardware trust.
Developer Experience & Ecosystem Readiness
COTI provides:
-
Solidity compatibility
-
Encrypted EVM contracts without new DSLs
-
Devnet access and open SDKs
-
Gas abstraction for simplified UX
In contrast:
ZK: Requires learning new languages and optimizing circuits.
FHE: Tooling is still academic.
TEE: Requires deployment on specific hardware.
COTI's developer-first approach means you don’t need a cryptography PhD to ship a privacy-first dApp.
Conclusion: A Pragmatic Privacy Layer for the Real World
Each privacy-preserving technology has a place in the decentralized stack:
ZK: Excellent for proof verification and scalable rollups.
FHE: Theoretical ideal for encrypted computing, but not production-ready.
TEE: Fast and effective but centralized and opaque.
COTI offers the middle path with usable, compliant, encrypted computation now. Its balance of cryptographic integrity, developer usability, and ecosystem vision makes it a compelling option for builders who want both privacy and practicality.
If you're a developer looking to integrate private computation without reinventing your entire stack, COTI V2 deserves your attention.
ALSO READ: What is COTI V2: Revolutionizing Blockchain Privacy with Garbled Circuits
