Main site

Authorization, not transfer

Why nothing is ever sent to you, and why that matters.

When you pay someone from a wallet, the money makes two hops: into your wallet, then out to them. NULL removes the first hop. Money goes from the reserve to the payee, and your job is to authorize it, not to carry it.

THE USUAL WAY Source Your wallet a balance, with your name on it Payee drained · watched · frozen · traced WITH NULL Null Reserve value moves once, reserve to payee You authorize Payee

The middle box is the whole difference. In the usual model your wallet sits between the source and the payee, holding a balance. That box is where theft, surveillance, freezing and tracing all happen. NULL deletes it: you authorize the payment, and the reserve pays the payee directly.

Side by side

WalletNULL
You holdThe tokensA right to spend
Paying isA transfer out of your balanceA payout from the reserve
Key stolenYou lose the balanceYou lose outstanding rights
Watchers seeYour balance and historyReserve activity, nobody's in particular
To freeze youFreeze your addressThere's no address to freeze

Why that first hop is the problem

Nearly everything people hate about on-chain money is a property of the hop into your wallet. It's where the balance lives, so it's where drains happen. It's where history piles up, so it's where chain analysis works. It's the thing a third party can act against, so it's where freezes happen.

Take it out and you don't have to defend against any of it. It isn't there.

What you give up

There are real trade-offs, and you should know them before you decide this is for you:

  • You can't hold a position. Spending rights let you spend. They aren't something you can sit on, send to a friend, or point at as an asset. If you want to hold, this isn't the tool.
  • You depend on the reserve having depth. Your ability to spend relies on reserves being well supplied. That's a shared condition, not something you control on your own.
  • Rules matter more than they do in a wallet. In a wallet the rule is "you have the key". Here the rules are written into reserve policy, so what they say and who can change them becomes something you have to care about.

Those three are the substance of any fair criticism of this design, which is why they're up here rather than buried at the bottom. The threat model goes further.

What you don't give up

The experience. Saying what you want and having it settle is about the same number of clicks as signing a transaction. The difference is structural, and someone just paying for something shouldn't have to think about any of it.