Ethereum co-founder Vitalik Buterin has raised concerns about the rising use of zero-knowledge (ZK) proofs in digital identity systems. While he acknowledges that ZK technology strengthens privacy, Buterin argues that its application in building universal IDs could backfire.  He thinks that these kinds of systems will threaten pseudonymity and enable surveillance, particularly in authoritarian regimes or poorly setup biometrics systems. 

Buterin has called on the blockchain community to shun rigid identity frameworks. He said that wrapping ZK proofs to traditional IDs might create an illusion of security. Instead, he proposes a model of identity called a ‘pluralistic identity’ which allows different decentralized types of verification. This would help guard privacy, freedom of the user and the system resilience. 

Buterin Calls Out ZK-Based Identity Frameworks

Zero-knowledge proofs help users establish whether certain data like age or nationality, is true, without revealing the actual data. This mode of identity is applied to safeguard the privacy of users in many Web3 projects, such as Worldcoin. Nevertheless, in a blog post published on June 28, Vitalik Buterin cautioned that integrating this technology with IDs creates new problems.

According to him, the concept of one-ID-per-person, even with the ZK Proofs, compromises levels of pseudonymity and makes users be subject to a single identity. This, he says, lowers current privacy standards and increases risks of coercion or surveillance. In authoritarian settings, it could make it easier for governments to monitor citizens or fabricate IDs to disrupt systems. 

“Under one-per-person ID, even if ZK-wrapped, we risk coming closer to a world where all of your activity must de-facto be under a single public identity. In a world of growing risk (eg. drones), taking away the option for people to protect themselves through pseudonymity has significant downsides,” he noted.

The Ethereum co-founder also highlights the practical shortcomings of current ID models. He adds that government identity cards do not cater to the needs of stateless people or displaced persons. Attackers can forge or use Biometric identifiers, often seen as foolproof inappropriately, especially during critical situations.

In these instances, scammers might be capable of reproducing fingerprints or facial information to pretend to be users. This not only a risk to personal security but it discredits the credibility of entire decentralized networks. He adds that enforcing a single identity removes the option of pseudonymity, which is critical for activists, developers, and vulnerable groups operating online. 

Vitalik Buterin Calls For Pluralistic Identity

As a solution, Buterin proposes a “pluralistic identity” framework; one that doesn’t rely on a single authority or method. The Ethereum co-founder defines two primary versions: explicit pluralism, in which identity is constructed through community trust and peer verification. On the other hand, he advocates for implicit pluralism in which any user is able to log in to services using a variety of logins including email or social accounts.

“By “pluralistic identity”, I mean an identity regime where there is no single dominant issuing authority, whether that’s a person, or an institution, or a platform,” he wrote.

Buterin further cites projects such as Circle whose basis is separate attestations of peers as an example of an explicit model. Implicit models allow flexibility without enforcing uniformity. Both aim to prevent any single provider from gaining total control over identity systems.

Vitalik Buterin proposes Pluralistic IDs to protect privacy & fairness.

-ZK-proofs help with private verification, but enforcing 1 ID per person can backfire
-Risks: Loss of pseudonymity, coercion, central control
-Pluralistic IDs = no single authority, more user freedom#Web3… pic.twitter.com/ZoyRPFfD7S

— Joe Swanson (@Joe_Swanson057) June 28, 2025

Buterin believes this structure is more inclusive and resilient. If one method fails – for instance, and attackers corrupt biometric data – users still have alternatives. Nevertheless, he cautions that a one-dominant ID solution would be counter-productive because it would reinstitute the same centralization problems.

“If any one form of ID gets close to 100% market share, and it becomes realistic to demand it as a sole login option. This to me is the biggest risk that could come from identity systems that try too hard to be “universal,” Buterin remarked. 

The Ethereum co-founder challenges the crypto community to adopt complexity and variety in the design of digital identities. According to him, protecting privacy and personal choice means fighting against one-size-fits-all. This could help create systems that are flexible, decent, and user-centered.