TL;DR

• Garbled Circuits (GCs) are a privacy-preserving computation method that’s been around for decades but no chain used them until COTI.
• Unlike ZK and FHE, GC offers practical speed, low cost, and flexible programmability.
• COTI V2 quietly became the first L2 to deploy GC-based smart contracts in a real environment.
• Most chains avoided GC due to complexity, lack of tooling, and missing infrastructure. COTI solved that.
• This isn’t hype tech. It’s a calculated move that positions COTI as a new category of privacy infrastructure.

Some crypto projects promise privacy. COTI built it. And not with ZK-snarks, rings, or mixers. Instead, COTI V2 uses something very few in Web3 even mention: Garbled Circuits.

It’s an obscure term for a powerful idea: run smart contracts on encrypted data without decrypting it. Garbled Circuits are older than Bitcoin. But they’ve rarely been deployed outside of academic experiments or small-scale demos. So why did COTI choose them? And why did no one else?

Here’s the full breakdown.

What Are Garbled Circuits?

Originally proposed by Andrew Yao in the 1980s, Garbled Circuits are part of a broader category called Secure Multiparty Computation (MPC). They allow two or more parties to compute a function without revealing their inputs.

In blockchain terms? You could:

• Run a smart contract without revealing who sent what
• Validate logic privately
• Set up conditions where data stays encrypted, but results are correct.

This is different from ZK proofs, where you prove you know something without revealing it. GCs go further: you actually run computation on hidden inputs.

So Why Didn’t Anyone Else Use GC?

Three reasons:

1. Tooling Didn’t Exist

GCs are hard to compile, hard to optimize, and harder to make compatible with existing dev languages.

ZK got more attention because of libraries like Circom and Noir. GC didn’t have that ecosystem until COTI built it.

2. Too Academic

Until recently, GC was seen as a research toy. No one built production-grade systems with it. It lived in cryptography papers and labs.

3. Too Much Overhead (Until Now)

GC used to be slow. But recent advances and COTI’s in-house optimizations changed that.

COTI’s Breakthrough: GC at L2 Speed

In 2024, COTI published benchmarks that shocked many in the privacy space:

GC on COTI works with:

• Ethereum-compatible smart contracts
• COTI-native token for gas
• TypeScript and Python SDKs
• Private execution with provable correctness

How It Actually Works (Without the Jargon)

Imagine Alice wants to pay Bob but only if a private condition is met (say, Bob completed a task).

On Ethereum:

• You’d need to show the condition on-chain.
• Everyone sees it.

On COTI:

• The logic is encrypted.
• The result is visible (payment happens or not).

But no one sees, not even the validators. That’s Garbled Circuits.

READ MORE : COTI V2’s Secret Weapon: Garbled Circuits Explained for the Web3 Era

Use Cases No Other Chain Can Handle Like This

GCs unlock new use cases that don’t work on ZK or FHE chains today:

• Sealed-bid auctions
  Bidders submit encrypted offers. Logic picks the winner. No leaks. No front running.

• Private subscription payments
  Check if payment is valid. Don’t reveal wallet history or token flows.

• Cross-border compliance
  Let validators verify KYC status without seeing documents.

• DeFi with policy logic
  Build lending, staking, and insurance with confidential user data but provable outcomes.

These use cases demand privacy with rules.

ZK vs GC: Why COTI Chose a Different Path

Most privacy chains in Web3 lean heavily on zero-knowledge proofs (ZK). They’re powerful and mathematically elegant but they come with trade-offs. COTI went another way, and that choice wasn’t random.

ZK systems are ideal for proving something without revealing the underlying data. But they often require specialized programming languages, large amounts of computation, and rigid structures that limit flexibility. For example, building a private auction or a multi-step subscription logic using ZK is possible but it’s clunky and expensive.

Garbled Circuits, on the other hand, let developers run full logic privately. Not just proofs, but actual decision trees, policies, and interactions. They’re faster in practice, lighter in storage, and don’t need massive on-chain verification. That’s why COTI V2 feels different. It’s not hiding behind buzzwords. It’s building a privacy stack that’s programmable, modular, and made for products. 

Why This Matters for the Future of Web3

Web3 can’t scale without usable privacy. Users don’t want their wallets exposed. Merchants don’t want to leak data. Institutions need compliance without surveillance.

COTI built for that middle zone:

• Programmable
• Compliant
• Private by default

It’s not just about ideology. It’s about enabling use cases that don’t work on public or ZK-only chains.

Final Word

Garbled Circuits are old tech. But in COTI’s hands, they become something new: a realistic path to programmable privacy. Most chains avoided this route because it was too hard. COTI took the risk. And now they might be years ahead.

If the next evolution of Web3 requires logic that doesn’t leak and privacy that actually works, COTI may have already solved it.