Vitalik Buterin Imagines ‘Pluralistic’ Digital IDs to Ensure Privacy and Equal Access Ethereum co-founder Vitalik Buterin has recently outlined a new vision for digital identity systems through the idea of “pluralistic identity” to reconcile privacy, security, and equal access in the digital realm. In a recent blog post, Buterin praised innovations like zero-knowledge (ZK) proof-based IDs but warned that the majority of systems have the potential to compromise user privacy if they are not protected against centralization. Risks of a Single Digital Identity Buterin argued that even ZK-wrapped IDs, as robust as they are, are risks if platforms enforce a policy of one ID per individual. He cautioned that it would be a de facto killing of pseudonymity — a valuable component of internet freedom. “In the real world, pseudonymity typically means having several accounts,” Buterin explained. Forcing users into a single identity could expose them to excessive state, employer, or corporate surveillance. He also criticized use of “proof of wealth” as a protection against Sybil attacks, pointing out that it would disenfranchise the poor and make control more centralized. The Pluralistic Alternative To address these threats, Buterin suggested the idea of pluralistic identities — decentralized systems in which users can have multiple, socially authenticated IDs from various sources. These systems could combine authentication via social graphs, government IDs, and online platforms without allowing any one party absolute control. “Pluralistic identity is more error-tolerant,” he explained, and above all, helps those who lack access to traditional documentation, such as stateless individuals. A Hybrid Future for Digital ID Buterin sees a future where hybrid designs for identity — blending one-per-person approaches with decentralized proof technology — will be able to empower citizens without reducing liberty. He warned that when any identification system becomes too dominant, it will drift towards the centralized, less-private system. Only a pluralistic system, he argued, can ensure privacy, inclusivity, and immunity against abuse.
