Ethereum
SWIFT Chooses Ethereum’s Linea: The Quiet Revolution in Global Finance
- Share
- Tweet /data/web/virtuals/383272/virtual/www/domains/theunhashed.com/wp-content/plugins/mvp-social-buttons/mvp-social-buttons.php on line 63
https://theunhashed.com/wp-content/uploads/2025/10/linea_joe_lubin-1000x600.png&description=SWIFT Chooses Ethereum’s Linea: The Quiet Revolution in Global Finance', 'pinterestShare', 'width=750,height=350'); return false;" title="Pin This Post">
When one of the world’s most powerful financial institutions makes a move toward blockchain, the industry takes notice. At the Token2049 conference in Singapore, ConsenSys CEO Joe Lubin revealed that SWIFT—the global interbank messaging giant—is building its new crypto settlement infrastructure on Linea, an Ethereum-based layer-2 network.
For a legacy institution synonymous with traditional banking rails to embrace decentralized infrastructure marks a profound inflection point. It’s not just a tech upgrade—it’s a shift in financial philosophy.
From Messaging to Settlement: SWIFT’s Next Evolution
SWIFT, the Society for Worldwide Interbank Financial Telecommunication, forms the circulatory system of global finance. Its messaging standards move trillions of dollars daily, ensuring banks across continents can communicate securely and efficiently. For decades, SWIFT’s role has been clear-cut: to deliver reliable, standardized financial instructions—not to settle or store value.
That’s changing.
Over the past few years, SWIFT has quietly explored how blockchain can complement or even enhance its existing infrastructure. In a major step forward, the organization announced the development of a 24/7 real-time payments system built on crypto rails. Though initial announcements carefully avoided naming the specific blockchain involved, Lubin lifted the curtain: SWIFT’s new system is being built on Linea, a layer-2 Ethereum scaling solution developed by ConsenSys.
According to Lubin, the response from banking audiences to this revelation was “very positive,” suggesting that financial institutions are more open than ever to engaging with decentralized technologies. SWIFT CEO Javier Pérez-Tasso, who first revealed the payment system initiative, had reportedly withheld the name Linea to allow a gentler rollout—a testament to the cautious but deliberate pace of traditional finance in adopting Web3 tools.
Why Linea? Why Now?
Linea isn’t just another Ethereum sidechain. It’s a zero-knowledge Ethereum Virtual Machine (zkEVM) rollup that combines the composability of Ethereum with the scalability of cutting-edge cryptographic proofs. For SWIFT, this technical profile solves two long-standing pain points: speed and cost.
Ethereum’s mainnet, while secure and decentralized, can be prohibitively expensive and slow for enterprise-grade financial flows. Linea sidesteps these constraints, offering roughly 1.5 transactions per second at fees that are a fraction—about one-fifteenth—of Ethereum’s baseline. This is particularly crucial for an institution like SWIFT, which needs throughput and predictability to satisfy both regulators and clients.
But technical specs are only part of the appeal. By building on Linea, SWIFT aligns itself with the most mature smart contract ecosystem in the blockchain world. Ethereum’s vast array of developer tools, liquidity pools, bridges, and standards creates a fertile ground for building real-world financial applications—without starting from scratch. Moreover, Linea’s total value locked currently places it among the top Ethereum layer-2 networks, indicating a healthy and growing user base.
Lubin has spoken of Linea as more than a payments rail; he sees it as a foundational layer for a “user-generated civilization,” a place where communities, applications, and protocols can emerge organically. In this sense, Linea is not merely a tool but a platform for institutional creativity and reinvention.
Banks Enter the Blockchain Arena
SWIFT is not alone in this venture. Over 30 financial institutions, including giants like Bank of America, Citi, JPMorgan Chase, and Toronto-Dominion Bank, are reportedly participating in pilot tests of the Linea-based settlement system. For these banks, it’s a chance to engage directly with smart contract infrastructure while maintaining the familiarity of the SWIFT ecosystem.
This signals a dramatic shift in tone. Not long ago, most banks were content to observe blockchain developments from the sidelines, cautious of regulatory scrutiny and uncertain about technical risk. Now, they are stepping into the ring, testing programmable money and decentralized ledgers not as threats but as tools to enhance efficiency, transparency, and interoperability.
The implications are enormous. SWIFT handles over $150 trillion in cross-border payments annually. Even if a fraction of this volume moves to Linea-based infrastructure, it could radically reshape the settlement landscape. It would also challenge existing players in the blockchain-for-banks space—particularly Ripple, which has long positioned its XRP Ledger as the go-to solution for financial institutions.
The emergence of SWIFT’s own crypto-based rail calls that assumption into question. Unlike Ripple’s bespoke blockchain, Linea benefits from Ethereum’s open architecture and broad adoption. That could give it an edge in attracting developers, liquidity, and regulatory support.
Bridging TradFi and DeFi: Still a Work in Progress
Despite the fanfare, several challenges remain. Regulatory compliance will be a major hurdle. Financial institutions must satisfy strict anti-money laundering and know-your-customer protocols, even when transacting on decentralized networks. Integrating these safeguards into Linea’s architecture without compromising decentralization will require careful coordination.
Another issue is liquidity management. How will banks convert fiat to digital assets, or vice versa? Will stablecoins play a role, or will tokenized fiat be the preferred medium? These decisions will affect not only technical implementation but also regulatory posture and market adoption.
Security is also top of mind. While zk-rollups are considered highly secure, smart contracts remain susceptible to bugs and exploits. For a system handling institutional flows, the margin for error is razor-thin. SWIFT and its partners will need to conduct rigorous audits and build fallback mechanisms to mitigate potential risks.
Then there’s the question of adoption inertia. Legacy financial systems are deeply embedded, both technologically and culturally. Even with a compelling solution, convincing banks to shift settlement processes to a new platform will take time. SWIFT’s involvement helps ease this transition, but real-world adoption will require proven value, not just promise.
Finally, competition is heating up. Central bank digital currencies, private blockchain consortia, and alternative L1 chains are all vying for the attention of institutions. Whether Linea becomes the default infrastructure for bank-to-bank crypto settlement—or merely one of many options—remains to be seen.
A Vision of the Future: Programmable, Borderless Money
If the SWIFT-Linea collaboration succeeds, it could usher in a new era of programmable finance. Transactions won’t just move value—they’ll carry logic. Conditional payments, time-locked settlements, automated escrow, and decentralized compliance could become standard features of financial flows.
This programmable layer could also democratize access. Smaller financial institutions, fintech startups, and even non-bank actors could tap into a global settlement system without needing to replicate the infrastructure of a multinational bank.
Lubin’s framing of Linea as a substrate for user-generated governance and innovation is key here. It contrasts sharply with the hierarchical, top-down nature of most financial systems. Instead of being merely a service provider, SWIFT becomes a bridge—linking institutions to a decentralized ecosystem where power, rules, and tools are more evenly distributed.
This vision won’t materialize overnight. But the foundations are being laid. With Linea, Ethereum is no longer just the home of DeFi—it’s becoming the operating system of the financial world.
Conclusion: The Infrastructure Revolution is Quiet—but Profound
SWIFT’s embrace of Linea represents more than a technical pivot; it’s a philosophical one. For decades, SWIFT has epitomized centralized trust, institutional reliability, and cautious evolution. By partnering with a decentralized network like Linea, it signals a readiness to redefine those values in a world where trust is programmed, not presumed.
The lines between traditional finance and decentralized infrastructure are beginning to blur. If SWIFT, the ultimate icon of financial conservatism, can make that leap, perhaps the rest of the industry will follow.
Ethereum
Small Kingdom, Big Move — Bhutan Stakes $970 K of ETH via Figment to Back National Blockchain Ambitions
Bhutan Turns Heads With Institutional‑Grade ETH Stake
The government of Bhutan quietly moved 320 ETH — worth roughly $970,000 — to Figment, the well-known staking provider, signaling a major shift in how the Himalayan kingdom engages with crypto. Rather than a speculative or retail‑style buy, this is an institutional‑level stake: the amount deployed corresponds to 10 full Ethereum validators (since each validator requires 32 ETH).
More Than Just Yield: Bhutan Anchors Crypto in Governance
Bhutan’s ETH stake comes on the heels of a far broader crypto‑adoption push. In October 2025 the country launched a sovereign national digital identity system — built not on a private chain, but on the public Ethereum blockchain. The decision to anchor citizen identities on a decentralized, globally supported network like Ethereum underscores a long‑term vision: decentralized identity, on‑chain transparency, and national infrastructure built with blockchain.
For Bhutan, this ETH stake isn’t about short‑term price swings or hype — it reflects a strategic bet on Proof‑of‑Stake infrastructure. By running validators via Figment, the government contributes to network security, potentially earns rewards, and aligns its own holdings and governance systems with the protocols underlying its digital‑ID rollout.
What This Signals for Ethereum — and for Crypto Governance
Though 320 ETH is a drop in the bucket compared to total staked ETH globally, the move carries symbolic weight. A sovereign state publicly committing funds to ETH staking via a recognized institutional provider adds to the broader narrative: that Proof‑of‑Stake networks are maturing, and that blockchain can underpin more than speculative assets — it can support identity, governance, and long-term infrastructure.
Moreover, it highlights that institutional staking services like Figment are increasingly trusted not only by hedge funds or corporations, but by governments. According to Figment’s own data, their Q3 2025 validator participation rate stood at 99.9%, and they reported zero slashing events — underlining the reliability such clients are counting on.
What to Watch Next
Will Bhutan stake more ETH? On‑chain data shows the wallet still holds a portion of ETH that remains unstaked — suggesting potential for future validator additions.
Will other nations follow suit? If Bhutan’s mixed use of crypto — combining reserve assets, public‑service infrastructure, and staking — proves viable, it could serve as a blueprint for other smaller states looking to modernize governance with blockchain.
Will this affect ETH’s valuation? Hard to say immediately. The 320 ETH is unlikely to move market prices by itself. But if this step becomes part of a larger trend toward institutional and sovereign staking, the cumulative effect on demand and network security could indirectly support ETH’s long-term value proposition.
Ethereum
Vitalik Buterin’s $760K Bet on Privacy: What His Donation to Session & SimpleX Chat Signals for Crypto Messaging
The Ethereum Co-Founder’s Move Sends a Clear Message
When Vitalik Buterin committed a six-figure sum to two emerging privacy-focused messaging apps, it wasn’t just philanthropy — it was a strategic statement. Buterin donated 256 ETH, worth around $760,000, split evenly between Session and SimpleX Chat. His stated goal was to support projects pushing the boundaries of messaging privacy, especially those eliminating traditional identifiers like phone numbers and making metadata invisible.
This kind of move doesn’t happen in a vacuum. In a time when digital surveillance is tightening and governments are scrutinizing communication platforms with increasing intensity, Buterin’s gesture highlights a pivot: from just end-to-end encryption to full-stack privacy, where even metadata — who, when, how often — is protected.
Why Session and SimpleX Matter Now
Session and SimpleX represent a different paradigm from mainstream encrypted apps like Signal or Telegram. Session leverages a decentralized onion-routing network to remove central points of failure and obscure the origin and destination of messages. It doesn’t require a phone number or email to create an account, which means your communication identity isn’t linked to your real-world ID.
SimpleX Chat takes a similarly radical approach. It discards all global user identifiers and uses temporary, non-persistent session IDs. By default, it avoids any server-side storage of user metadata. This pushes the envelope on what private messaging can mean in a Web3 context.
But these aren’t just fringe apps. They represent a broader movement aiming to decouple identity from communication — something that increasingly resonates in crypto-native communities, where pseudonymity and sovereignty are core values.
More Than Encryption: The Metadata Battle
Traditional “secure messaging” has largely focused on content encryption — making sure only sender and receiver can read the messages. But in reality, metadata often tells a more powerful story. When messages were sent, how often you interact with someone, and your communication graph can all be used for behavioral profiling or even retroactive surveillance.
Buterin made clear that metadata privacy is what matters most now. Without tackling this, he argued, truly private communication cannot exist. That’s what sets his donation apart from the usual talk around encryption — it’s a direct endorsement of messaging without identifiers, without centralized relays, and without traceable networks.
This push is timely. As lawmakers in the EU and elsewhere explore so-called “chat control” proposals that would force companies to scan messages or retain metadata, the crypto space is responding by building alternatives. These aren’t just apps — they’re defensive tools for digital sovereignty.
A New Standard for Web3 Messaging
The implications for the broader crypto and Web3 landscape are significant. Messaging is the most common digital activity, and yet Web3 has largely ignored it in favor of finance and infrastructure. But with Buterin’s donation, a clear priority emerges: communication deserves the same decentralization and privacy guarantees that DeFi or NFTs claim to offer.
These apps could become part of a broader stack of decentralized identity and communication tools. Imagine wallets that message, DAOs that coordinate privately, or pseudonymous communities built on trustless comms. It’s not hard to see a future where crypto-native messaging protocols replace traditional platforms for everything from coordination to customer support.
That said, the technical challenges are steep. Delivering strong metadata privacy without sacrificing multi-device support, uptime, or usability is no easy feat. Session, for instance, still struggles with message delivery in fringe networks. SimpleX is relatively new and has yet to scale its infrastructure globally.
But if these projects succeed, they may define what Web3 communication should look like: decentralized, permissionless, and invisible to the watchers.
What Comes Next
Vitalik Buterin’s donation is a catalyst, but it also raises expectations. Privacy-focused apps like Session and SimpleX must now prove they can scale beyond early adopters. That means building user-friendly interfaces, integrating with crypto tools, and making privacy seamless — not a technical obstacle.
If these apps succeed, they could become foundational in the same way MetaMask or Uniswap did in their domains. And if others follow Buterin’s lead — both with capital and adoption — we could see a serious pivot in Web3 toward communication infrastructure that doesn’t leak our lives through metadata.
In the age of AI surveillance, mass data collection, and algorithmic profiling, who you message — not just what you say — is a liability. But with projects like Session and SimpleX now backed by Ethereum’s most influential founder, the path to invisible messaging just got a powerful new boost.
Ethereum
Offchain Labs Pushes Back on Vitalik Buterin’s RISC‑V Proposal, Says WASM Is the Smarter Path for Ethereum
In a move that could influence the next generation of blockchain architecture, Offchain Labs — the core developer behind the Arbitrum ecosystem — has publicly challenged Vitalik Buterin’s recently floated idea to adopt the RISC‑V instruction set architecture (ISA) as the foundation for Ethereum’s execution layer. The research team argues that while RISC‑V has become prominent in zero‑knowledge (ZK) proof systems, it may not be the optimal choice for smart‑contract delivery on layer one. Instead, they propose WebAssembly (WASM) as a more future‑proof format.
The Core of the Debate
Offchain Labs’ researchers introduce a useful conceptual separation: the “delivery ISA” (dISA), which defines how contracts are uploaded and stored on‑chain, versus the “proving ISA” (pISA), which is used by ZK‑VMs to verify execution. They argue that Vitalik’s proposal implicitly assumes a single ISA should serve both roles, but this assumption risks locking Ethereum into a format optimized for today’s ZK proving, not long‑term delivery and flexibility.
The team points out that RISC‑V has shown strong performance in ZK proof contexts, but it does not necessarily perform well in diverse node‑hardware environments, where most clients do not run native RISC‑V CPUs. Emulating RISC‑V on commonly used hardware introduces inefficiencies and may undermine decentralization. WASM, by contrast, executes efficiently on general hardware, is type‑safe, and benefits from a robust and well‑supported developer ecosystem.
Implications for Ethereum’s Future
The research suggests that anchoring Ethereum’s delivery ISA to RISC‑V now could effectively freeze the ecosystem into a proving‑ISA strategy that may become outdated as ZK‑VM architectures evolve. They caution that RISC‑V was never designed primarily for ZK proving or smart‑contract delivery but rather for hardware microprocessors — a fact that limits its long‑term suitability in a general‑purpose blockchain context.
By selecting WASM for contract delivery, with the option to compile it into whatever proving ISA emerges as superior, the blockchain ecosystem retains flexibility, avoids hardware lock‑in, and aligns smart‑contract deployment with a mature and widely supported programming standard. Offchain Labs argues WASM could philosophically serve as an “Internet protocol” layer for smart contracts — agnostic to the underlying hardware or proof system.
Why This Matters Right Now
Ethereum is nearing a set of protocol design decisions that will shape not just the next upgrade, but its evolution over the coming decade. As ZK proof technologies evolve and node hardware becomes increasingly heterogeneous, selecting an ISA for Layer 1 becomes a strategic architectural choice, not just a technical one. If Ethereum adopts an ISA optimized solely for today’s proving stack, it may compromise adaptability, decentralization, and inclusivity across hardware platforms.
Offchain Labs’ response reframes the ISA decision as a battle between flexibility and immediate efficiency. Their argument is simple: prioritize future‑proofing over optimization for today’s ZK tech.
What to Monitor
Over the next several months, developers and observers should keep an eye on Ethereum’s core roadmap and community discussions. Will the network choose separate ISAs for delivery and proving? Will it commit to RISC‑V or pivot to WASM? The maturity of tooling, compiler support, and infrastructure around WASM could prove decisive, especially as alternative ZK‑VM designs begin to experiment with non‑RISC architectures.
Ultimately, this may look like a low‑level implementation dispute, but it reveals something deeper: Ethereum’s infrastructure choices today will define its trajectory for the next decade. The RISC‑V vs. WASM debate is not just about smart contracts — it’s about what kind of computational future Ethereum wants to build.
-
Cardano2 months agoCardano Breaks Ground in India: Trivolve Tech Launches Blockchain Forensic System on Mainnet
-
Cardano2 months agoCardano Reboots: What the Foundation’s New Roadmap Means for the Blockchain Race
-
Cardano2 days agoSolana co‑founder publicly backs Cardano — signaling rare cross‑chain respect after 2025 chain‑split recovery
-
Bitcoin2 months agoQuantum Timebomb: Is Bitcoin’s Foundation About to Crack?
-
Cardano2 months agoAfter the Smoke Clears: Cardano, Vouchers, and the Vindication of Charles Hoskinson
-
Cardano2 months agoMidnight and Google Cloud Join Forces to Power Privacy‑First Blockchain Infrastructure
-
Ripple2 months agoRipple CTO David “JoelKatz” Schwartz to Step Down by Year’s End, but Will Remain on Board
-
News2 months agoRipple’s DeFi Awakening: How mXRP Is Redefining the Role of XRP
