Into the pool.
Deposit SOL or a supported SPL token. The intended protocol creates a private note controlled by your keys. Deposits themselves may remain visible.
A moving model of encrypted notes and selective disclosure.
Follow the crawler. Watch readable data become ciphertext.
› initialize local model
The same sample records, viewed by the public, the owner, or a scoped auditor. Switch perspectives.
Interactive simulation. Balances and actions below are local examples; no assets move onchain.
Outside the shielded pool
Owner view · local simulation
Simulate moving SOL from a public balance into a shielded balance.
Local simulation only. Wallet connection requests your public address; it does not connect these balances to real holdings.
Deposit SOL or a supported SPL token. The intended protocol creates a private note controlled by your keys. Deposits themselves may remain visible.
Zero-knowledge proofs would verify valid spends and prevent double-spending without disclosing the protected transfer details.
Withdraw to an address. A relayer could submit the transaction and pay gas, reducing a direct fee-payment link to your main wallet.
The planned view-key feature would let an accountant or auditor read a defined scope, without permission to move funds. Choose a date range and which information to share.
Once someone has seen information, you cannot make them forget it. Narrow the scope before sharing.
The key generator below creates a local sample token, not a cryptographic view key.
Can read: chosen fields. Can spend: never.
The proposed unshielding fee funds relayers and token buybacks. Governance would choose which tokens gain support.
Proposed fee when leaving the pool.
Half the fee supports transaction submission.
Half the fee would buy and burn $CIPHER.
Proposed one-token, one-vote model.
Proposed design, not deployed token mechanics. No verified token contract or trading link is published here.
A small pool provides less cover. Actual protection depends on usage, protocol design and the available anonymity set.
Timing and recognizable amounts can reveal relationships even when some transaction data is protected.
CIPHER has no deployed privacy protocol. Circuits, contracts and key handling would need independent review.
A real private-note system may make recovery impossible if keys are lost. View keys can expose what you choose to share.
No. This site illustrates the product flow. Shield, Send and Unshield are simulations; no deposits or transfers are submitted.
No. They are local sample balances and remain separate from a connected wallet’s real assets.
The proposed view-key design is read-only. Sample keys here only control which sample fields the auditor view displays.
The initial design targets SOL, with additional SPL tokens proposed through governance after protocol implementation and review.
Explore privacy with boundaries you can understand.