---
robots: noindex, nofollow
title: HRF - Freedom Tech Challenges
---

# Freedom Tech Challenges: Finding Our Venn Intersection
*HRF + Christopher Allen + Blockchain Commons Discussion - July 8 2025*

*Note: This is a living document - let's edit together as we discuss*

---

## 🎯 Core Question
Where does HRF's mission intersect with my architectural solutions and advocacy efforts for freedom technology?

---

## 🎯 The Dual Strategy (TAoA + Exodus Protocol)

**Not Either/Or but Both/And:**
1. **Build Alternatives** (Blockchain Commons pragmatic work)
- CSR servers, FROST tools, reference implementations (Gordian Stack)
- Communities over tools (Exodus Protocol)

2. **Shape Constraints** (The Architecture of Autonomy policy work)
- Model laws, architectural standards, advocacy
- Making surveillance harder by design

**Why This Matters**: Authoritarians adapt. We need both escape routes AND barriers.

---

## 🔴 The Pricebleed Problem (Example of Systemic Issues)

### What Happens When a Wallet Checks Prices:

User Action: Check BTC price
    ↓
Wallet → API call → Exchange/Service
    ↓
LEAKED: • IP address/location
        • Device fingerprint  
        • Timing patterns
        • Query frequency
        • Software version
    ↓
Result: Transaction intentions exposed before execution

### Current "Solutions" Don't Work:
- **VPN**: Hides IP, not query patterns
- **Tor**: Hides location, not device fingerprint
- **Privacy coins**: Don't address metadata leakage

**Core Issue**: APIs and network access have become surveillance vectors

And this may be only a small part of the threat! European digital identity wallets (EUDI) are normalizing:
- **ZKP theater**: Privacy tech that's meaningless when Google tracks everything else
- **Incentive circumvention**: Free services, tokens, dark patterns to extract data anyway
- **Platform lock-in**: Even Apple's "privacy" creates dependencies authoritarians exploit
- **"Phone home" default**: Every interaction potentially tracked, normalized globally

---

## 🏗️ Architectural vs Feature-Based Thinking

### Feature-Based (Current Approach)
- Add privacy features to existing wallets
- Bolt-on security after design
- Assume benign environment
- Optimize for convenience

### Architectural (What We Need)
- Privacy as foundational design principle
- Adversarial assumptions from start
- Minimize attack surface
- Optimize for autonomy

---

## 🏛️ Proven Track Record: Code → Law → Global Standards

### Wyoming Success → National/Global Impact
- **2019-2021**: Key advisor to Wyoming legislature on pioneering digital asset and identity laws
- **Breakthrough Results**:
- First jurisdiction globally to protect private keys as personal property
- First to recognize agency law as alternative to property/contract for digital assets
- Created legal foundation for self-sovereign digital rights
- **Current Momentum**:
- BPI bringing me to DC to shape federal legislation
- Presenting model laws to multiple US states
- Speaking globally on implementing self-sovereign principles in law
- **Global Reach**: Advising governments worldwide on rights-preserving digital frameworks

### SSI Principles → W3C Standards
- **2016**: Published "10 Principles of Self-Sovereign Identity"
- **Result**: Influenced global identity standards and implementations
- **Current**: DID standard adopted by major platforms worldwide
- **Ongoing**: Invited expert to multiple W3C standards groups, including DID and VC updates

### Why This Matters for HRF
**I bridge technical architecture → legal frameworks → practical implementation**
- Not just theory: real laws protecting real people
- Not just local: scaling from Wyoming to worldwide
- Not just technical: translating code into policy

---

## 📊 Key Challenge Areas

### 1. Wallet Reliability Under Adversarial Conditions
- **Problem**: Wallets assume stable connectivity, legal protections
- **Need**: Intermittent access, state surveillance resistance
- **Proposed**: CSR (Collaborative Seed Recovery) - HRF hosts backup shares

### 2. Key Management for High-Threat Users
- **Problem**: Single points of failure = catastrophic
- **Need**: Threshold signatures + social recovery for adversarial environments
- **Question**: How to balance security with non-technical user needs?

### 3. Identity & Pseudonymous Development
- **Problem**: SSI principles don't translate to dissident needs
- **Need**: Progressive disclosure, portable reputation as survival tools
- **Question**: Best practices for developers under surveillance?

### 4. Systemic vs Symptomatic Solutions
- **Problem**: Individual tools fail when architecture is flawed
- **Need**: Evaluation frameworks for what actually protects
- **Question**: How to build sustainable communities, not just tools?

### 5. European Digital Identity Crisis (Emerging Threat)
- **Problem**: EU wallets becoming surveillance infrastructure despite privacy promises
- **Reality**: Google/Big Tech integration, "phone home" architectures
- **Risk**: Authoritarian template for global identity systems
- **Question**: Does HRF want a voice in this critical debate?

---

## 🚨 Urgent: European Identity Wallets Setting Global Precedent

### What's Happening
- **eIDAS 2.0**: EU's digital identity legislation
- **Big Tech capture**: Google Wallet integration, OS-level control
- **"Phone Home" problem**: Every use potentially tracked

### Why HRF Should Care
- **Global template**: What EU normalizes, authoritarians weaponize
- **Surveillance infrastructure**: Built into "privacy-preserving" systems
- **No funding for advocacy**: Critical voices being excluded

### The Ask
- **Support advocacy**: Currently unfunded but critical timing
- **Amplify concerns**: HRF's voice could shift debate
- **Connect dissidents**: Their needs ignored in current design

---

## 🔗 Multiplying HRF's Existing Impact

Your current grantees could be more effective with:
- **Architectural reviews**: Why do some tools fail under pressure?
- **Community support**: Connect isolated developers
- **Reference patterns**: Don't reinvent adversarial design
- **Policy backing**: Legal frameworks that protect their work

**The Opportunity**: Make every HRF dollar work harder by improving the architectural foundations all your grantees build on.

---

## 🤝 Potential Collaboration Models

### Option 1: Freedom Tech Design Workshops
**Based on RWOT Success**: 70+ papers → W3C DID standard
- 3-day collaborative sessions
- Dissidents + builders + architects
- Output: Specifications, not just ideas
- Venue: Oslo Freedom Forum?

### Option 2: Architectural Review Framework
- Systematic evaluation criteria
- "Does this actually protect users under threat?"
- Applied to grant proposals
- Published standards for community

### Option 3: Reference Implementations
- Open-source patterns for adversarial design
- Starting with pricebleed-resistant wallets
- CSR implementation for key management
- Progressive identity systems

### Option 4: Builder Community Cultivation
**"Exodus Protocol"** - Communities over tools
- Fund builder networks, not just projects
- Long-term sustainability focus
- Knowledge transfer emphasis
- Phoenix model: rising from platform ashes

---

## ⏰ The 5-10 Year Window

> "We have maybe 5-10 years before our entire digital world becomes as captured as social media is today."

- **CBDCs**: Being architected now
- **AI governance**: Embedding platform assumptions
- **IoT surveillance**: Expanding attack surface
- **Correlation capabilities**: Growing exponentially

---

## 🎨 Historical Parallel: The Decorative Buckets

**1816 Treaty of Paris**: Parisians with carriages must keep 2 water buckets for firefighting

**Result**: Decorative buckets with family crests - useless for fires

**150 years later**: Tourists photograph these "architectural elements"

**Today's Digital Architecture**:
- Privacy policies = decorative buckets
- Consent checkboxes = decorative buckets
- Terms of service = decorative buckets

*The city burns while we maintain compliance theater*

---

## 💡 Key Insights from The Architecture of Autonomy

### The Inversion
Digital platforms accidentally break centuries-old legal protections:
- **Property** → Licensed access
- **Contracts** → Changeable terms
- **Fiduciary duties** → Algorithmic optimization
- **Due process** → Automated moderation

### Why This Matters
> "Your dignity doesn't die alone. It dies entangled with the people you're no longer able to build with."

### The Opportunity
Architectural awareness + HRF's network = Solutions that actually work for 4.3B under authoritarianism

---

## 📋 Discussion Questions

### For HRF:
1. What failure modes do you see most often?
2. Which communities need solutions most urgently?
3. How do you currently evaluate freedom tech?
4. What support models work best for your mission?

### For Us:
1. Where do our capabilities best match your needs?
2. What's the right balance of immediate vs systemic?
3. How can we make architectural thinking accessible?
4. What would success look like in 12 months?

---

## 🚀 Next Steps?

Depending on interest:
- [ ] Pilot workshop at Oslo Freedom Forum
- [ ] Develop evaluation framework together
- [ ] CSR implementation for HRF network
- [ ] Strategic briefing for grant recipients
- [ ] Explore deeper integration (joining HRF while maintaining BC)
- [ ] Other: _______________

### Note on Integration
Christopher is also open in joining HRF team directly while keeping Blockchain Commons as pragmatic implementation arm. This would create tight theory↔practice feedback loop benefiting entire HRF network.

---

ORIGINAL

Alex & Team,

Looking forward to our call today! As I mentioned, I'm eager to puzzle through the intersection of what my team and I can contribute with what HRF needs to support communities under threat.

## The Adversarial Design Challenge

Your grantees face threats that Silicon Valley wallet designers never consider. Take **pricebleed** as just one example: When wallets fetch price data for USD⇔BTC conversion, they leak:
- Transaction intentions through timing patterns
- Holdings through query frequency
- Identity through device fingerprints
- Location through network endpoints

As you noted, AI will make these correlations trivial. Current privacy tools address symptoms, not root causes. We need architectural solutions.

## Key Challenges I See

Based on my experience with decentralized systems and identity:

1. **Wallet reliability under adversarial conditions**
- Most wallets assume stable connectivity and legal protections
- Need designs that work with intermittent access and state surveillance
- Our CSR (Collaborative Seed Recovery) proposal from last year - HRF hosting backup shares for dissidents

2. **Key management for high-threat users**
- Single points of failure are catastrophic for dissidents
- Threshold signatures and social recovery need adversarial redesign
- How do we balance security with usability for non-technical users?

3. **Identity and pseudonymous development**
- Self-sovereign identity principles don't always translate to dissident needs
- Progressive disclosure and portable reputation become survival tools
- Best practices for developers working under surveillance

4. **Systemic vs. symptomatic solutions**
- Individual tools often fail when the architecture is flawed
- Need frameworks for evaluating what actually protects users
- Building sustainable communities, not just one-off projects

## Exploring Our Venn Intersection

I'm particularly interested in understanding:
- What failure modes you see most often in current tools
- Which communities most urgently need these solutions
- How HRF evaluates freedom tech proposals
- Where our technical capabilities best match your strategic needs

## Potential Collaboration Models

Rather than prescribe solutions, I'd like to explore what makes sense for HRF:

1. **Design workshops** - Bringing together dissidents and builders to co-create solutions (based on my RWOT experience)
2. **Architectural reviews** - Evaluating whether tools truly serve users under threat
3. **Reference implementations** - Open-source patterns for adversarial environments
4. **Community cultivation** - Supporting builder networks that understand these challenges
5. **Policy advocacy** - Collaborating on model laws and standards that protect rather than surveil (leveraging my Wyoming→federal→global experience)

## A Different Approach: Multiplying Your Impact

What if instead of funding more tools, we helped make ALL your existing grantees more effective?

I see two complementary paths:
- **Top-down**: My "Architecture for Autonomy" framework helps evaluate and improve architectural choices
- **Bottom-up**: Blockchain Commons provides pragmatic implementation support

I'm even open to joining HRF directly while maintaining Blockchain Commons as the pragmatic implementation arm - creating a theory↔practice feedback loop that serves your entire network.

## For Today's Discussion

I'm keen to understand:
- Your perspective on the most critical technical gaps
- Communities that could pilot new approaches
- How to balance immediate needs with systemic solutions
- What support models work best for HRF's mission
- Whether HRF has interest in the European digital identity debate (currently setting precedents that authoritarians will adopt)

This isn't meant to be a laundry list but rather the start of a conversation about where we can have the most impact together. I believe the intersection of architectural thinking and HRF's on-the-ground experience could produce solutions that actually work for the 4.3 billion people living under digital authoritarianism.

Looking forward to puzzling through these challenges together.

-- Christopher Allen

P.S. I'm happy to share more details about any of these areas, including the Architecture of Autonomy framework I've been developing, but I'm most interested in hearing your perspective on what HRF needs.