Zcash WalletConnect Integration

1. Executive summary and decision snapshot

Noir Wallet requests $50,000 to build a Zcash-specific WalletConnect integration layer: wallet discovery, QR/URI pairing, session management, payment requests, local signing and broadcasting of shielded transactions, plus open-source reference wallet and dApp code. The applicant is Noir Wallet, led by “Zero,” with operational lead Aescobar and a stated team of ten additional developers. [1][4][5]

Funding is structured as $5,000 startup funding plus seven milestones totaling $45,000. Milestones 1–5 are scheduled from August through October 2026; milestones 6–7 are dated November 2027, creating a material uncertainty about whether the intended delivery horizon is roughly three months or more than a year. [8][9][10][11][12][13][16]

Decision snapshot: The request targets reusable ecosystem infrastructure rather than a single wallet integration, which may strengthen its public-good case. However, delivery value depends on successful WalletConnect onboarding, technically sound privacy/permission design, and adoption by additional Zcash wallets. The team claims relevant wallet and infrastructure experience and a completed prior Zcash wallet grant, but independently documented evidence of that prior grant’s milestones or outcomes is absent from the supplied record. [5][8][9]

2. Applicant and team track record

The proposal identifies Zero as CEO, claiming more than eight years in crypto, former BIHU core-development experience, and work on SocialFi, smart-wallet, DEX, DeFi architecture, and protocol design. Aescobar is identified as operational lead, with claimed NEAR-building, BTC bridge-volume, TVL, and governance experience. The application also states that ten other developers cover frontend and backend work. [1][5][6][7]

The applicant claims Noir Wallet previously completed a Zcash wallet proposal, including core wallet infrastructure, shielded transaction support, testing, security work, documentation, and mainnet deployment. [8]

Evidence limitation: No supplied source independently documents the prior Noir grant’s approval, milestone acceptance, code, deployment, or user outcomes. The claimed prior work is therefore relevant but not verified here.

Inference: The stated experience appears directionally relevant to wallet integration and delivery coordination, but the evidence does not identify the engineers responsible for cryptography, shielded-transaction implementation, security review, or ongoing maintenance—roles central to this proposal’s risk profile.

3. Proposal scope, milestones, budget, technical approach, and dependencies

The proposed integration would define Zcash WalletConnect identifiers, accounts, methods, permissions, and transaction flows; enable WalletGuide/Explorer discovery; support pairing, approval, recovery, and disconnection; and process payment requests including Unified Addresses, ZIP-321 mapping where applicable, shielded transactions, local signing, and transaction-result responses. The applicant says private and viewing keys would remain in the wallet. [4][5][8]

Budget:

• Compensation: $42,000 for development, architecture, testing, documentation, and management. [8]
• Services: $8,000 for hosting, testing/deployment, monitoring, and external security or technical review “where required.” [8]
• Hardware/software: $0. [8]

Milestones progress from architecture ($5,500), wallet discovery ($7,000), pairing/session management ($9,000), payment and shielded transaction support ($5,000), and reference code ($8,000), to testing/security review ($5,500) and documentation/adoption outreach ($5,000). [9][10][11][12][13]

Dependencies include WalletConnect’s SDK/WalletKit, Relay, WalletGuide and Explorer API; Zcash wallet libraries and infrastructure; mainnet/testnet access; test wallets; a reference dApp; and potential coordination with WalletConnect and other Zcash wallet developers. [5][7][8]

4. Community discussion, arguments, responses, and resolution

Strongest arguments for: The proposal frames WalletConnect as common infrastructure that could let multiple wallets and applications share a standardized connection flow, rather than funding a feature limited to Noir. It also commits to a public reference implementation and dApp, which could reduce integration effort for later adopters. [4][5][11][13]

Strongest arguments against / concerns: The application itself identifies privacy leakage through wallet identification, address reuse, metadata disclosure, misleading transaction prompts, external-service reliance, varying wallet architectures, and shielded-transaction complexity. These are substantive concerns because the project adds a connection and permissions layer around privacy-sensitive wallet actions. [9][13]

The proposed mitigations are separate integration code, reuse of Zcash libraries, local signing, non-transmission of keys, transaction/permission display, and a reference implementation. [8][9][13]

A forum participant offered personal support based on familiarity with the team, but provided no technical or outcome evidence. [13] A committee member asked whether milestones 6 and 7 were intended for 2027 or 2026; no applicant clarification is supplied. [16]

Resolution: The proposal describes mitigations, but no independent security review, WalletConnect commitment, or additional-wallet adoption commitment is documented. The schedule discrepancy remains unresolved.

5. Relevant precedents and documented outcomes

Zcash Integration for the Open Wallet Standard — Atmosphere Labs ($25,000, approved and marked complete). This is the closest approved precedent because it funded an interoperability standard intended to broaden Zcash wallet/payment integration. The committee cited reusable code, relatively limited technical risk, and applicant delivery credibility; the supplied record marks the grant complete. [18] Relevance: it supports considering shared standards infrastructure when it is scoped for reuse and delivered by a demonstrably capable team.

Zcash Support in NUFI Multi-Chain Wallet — NUFI ($49,000, declined). This is comparable in amount and wallet scope. The committee declined it because it viewed adding Zcash support as principally beneficial to the wallet itself, noted organic wallet adoption, and opposed paying for integrations one wallet at a time. [20] Relevance: Noir’s value case turns on whether its output is genuinely neutral, reusable infrastructure adopted beyond Noir—not merely subsidized functionality for Noir Wallet.

6. Material risks and execution considerations

• Schedule ambiguity: Milestones 6–7 are dated November 2027 while earlier work is dated August–October 2026. This materially affects expectations for time-to-value and maintenance exposure. [9][10][11][12][13][16]
• Privacy and authorization design: WalletConnect permissions and transaction requests may expose metadata or induce unsafe signing. Proposed UI confirmation is useful, but the scope does not specify an independent audit, reviewer, or auditable privacy acceptance standard. [9][12][13]
• External dependencies: Chain onboarding, directory inclusion, Relay operation, and other-wallet testing depend partly on external parties. [5][8][9]
• Adoption risk: Success includes two wallets entering or completing WalletGuide submission, but not necessarily shipping interoperable integrations or demonstrating sustained use. [9][13]
• Budget specificity: The $8,000 service category includes several functions and possible external review, without allocating review cost or defining its scope. [8]

7. Material gaps and questions for the applicant

1. Are milestones 6 and 7 intended for 2026 or 2027? Provide a corrected end-to-end schedule and explain what work, if any, occurs during the gap. [12][13][16]
2. Which Zcash wallets, besides Noir, have agreed to test, integrate, or submit to WalletGuide, and what commitments exist?
3. Who will conduct the stated security/privacy review, what threat model and deliverables will it cover, and is it independent of the implementation team? [8][12]
4. What exact WalletConnect chain-registration and namespace requirements remain subject to external approval, and what usable deliverables remain if approval is delayed? [8][9]
5. How will the project prevent or warn against address disclosure, address reuse, wallet fingerprinting, and deceptive transaction requests beyond displaying basic transaction details? [9][11][12]
6. Please provide verifiable evidence of Noir’s claimed prior Zcash grant completion, including accepted milestones and public deliverables. [8]
7. What license, repository-governance plan, and post-grant maintenance commitment will apply to the reference implementation?

8. Neutral decision considerations

• Potential value: Funding could create a reusable connection standard, reference implementation, and developer documentation that lower future integration costs across wallets and applications. [4][11][13]
• Value threshold: The outcome should be judged primarily by independently usable public code, sound privacy/security review, and adoption beyond Noir—not by WalletGuide submission activity alone. Inference.
• Funding structure: Milestone-gated payment can focus early funding on architecture, permission design, and chain-registration feasibility before larger integration and adoption expenditures. The current schedule should be corrected before conditions are finalized. [9][10][11][12][13][16]
• Precedent alignment: The request aligns more closely with the approved interoperable-standard precedent if it produces broadly reusable assets; it aligns with the declined NUFI precedent if practical benefit remains concentrated in one wallet. [18][20]

9. Numbered source list

• [1] Grant Application - Zcash WalletConnect Integration — https://github.com/ZcashCommunityGrants/zcashcommunitygrants/issues/391
• [4] Grant Application - Zcash WalletConnect Integration — posts 1–5, part 1 — https://forum.zcashcommunity.com/t/grant-application-zcash-walletconnect-integration/57026/1
• [5] Grant Application - Zcash WalletConnect Integration — posts 1–5, part 2 — https://forum.zcashcommunity.com/t/grant-application-zcash-walletconnect-integration/57026/1
• [8] Grant Application - Zcash WalletConnect Integration — posts 1–5, part 5 — https://forum.zcashcommunity.com/t/grant-application-zcash-walletconnect-integration/57026/1
• [9] Grant Application - Zcash WalletConnect Integration — posts 1–5, part 6 — https://forum.zcashcommunity.com/t/grant-application-zcash-walletconnect-integration/57026/1
• [10] Grant Application - Zcash WalletConnect Integration — posts 1–5, part 7 — https://forum.zcashcommunity.com/t/grant-application-zcash-walletconnect-integration/57026/1
• [11] Grant Application - Zcash WalletConnect Integration — posts 1–5, part 8 — https://forum.zcashcommunity.com/t/grant-application-zcash-walletconnect-integration/57026/1
• [12] Grant Application - Zcash WalletConnect Integration — posts 1–5, part 9 — https://forum.zcashcommunity.com/t/grant-application-zcash-walletconnect-integration/57026/1
• [13] Grant Application - Zcash WalletConnect Integration — posts 1–5, part 10 — https://forum.zcashcommunity.com/t/grant-application-zcash-walletconnect-integration/57026/1
• [16] Comment on #391: Grant Application - Zcash WalletConnect Integration — https://github.com/ZcashCommunityGrants/zcashcommunitygrants/issues/391#issuecomment-5369367874
• [6] Grant Application - Zcash WalletConnect Integration — posts 1–5, part 3 — https://forum.zcashcommunity.com/t/grant-application-zcash-walletconnect-integration/57026/1
• [7] Grant Application - Zcash WalletConnect Integration — posts 1–5, part 4 — https://forum.zcashcommunity.com/t/grant-application-zcash-walletconnect-integration/57026/1
• [18] Zcash Integration for the Open Wallet Standard (OWS) — comparison summary — https://github.com/ZcashCommunityGrants/zcashcommunitygrants/issues/255
• [20] Zcash Support in NUFI Multi-Chain Wallet — comparison summary — https://github.com/ZcashCommunityGrants/zcashcommunitygrants/issues/214