Founder
August 17, 2025
15 min read
The history of humanity is built upon the evolution of "trust" mechanisms. From sealed tablets and notarized documents to centralized bank ledgers and digital signatures, every innovation has been a product of the quest to reduce uncertainty between parties and bring finality to agreements. The emergence of blockchain technology in the early twenty-first century was the most audacious step in this quest: the promise of creating a trustless, intermediary-free network.
This promise, encapsulated in the principle "don't trust, verify," captivated millions. However, in the first decade of this revolution, we have come to face the reality that the act of "verification" itself is based less on absolute certainty and more on economic incentives and probabilistic assumptions. The security of existing systems relies not on immutable truth, but on the assumption that actors will behave rationally and that the cost of attacking the system will outweigh the potential gains. While this was revolutionary for the digital age, it has always come with a caveat for legal and financial systems that require absolute finality.
But what if we could shift the foundation of trust away from economic deterrence and ground it in an immutable, unquestionable, and universal language—mathematics itself? What if we could prove the validity of a transaction not with an economic assumption, but with a cryptographic proof, such as a Groth16 zk-SNARK?
The POAR protocol emerges as the answer to these questions. It is not merely a technological advancement but a philosophical revolution that redefines trust, proof, and finality. In this article, we at Genesis Law Firm will first conduct an in-depth examination of the legal and operational limits of current blockchain paradigms. We will then analyze the technical foundations of the mathematical certainty revolution brought by POAR and the profound legal transformations it creates in areas such as data privacy, contract law, regulations, and intellectual property. This is not just an analysis of a new technology, but a technical look into the foundations of future legal doctrine.
The effort to solve the "blockchain trilemma" (scalability, security, decentralization) has thus far been dominated by two main consensus mechanisms. While both have been groundbreaking in their own right, they carry fundamental limitations in terms of legal finality and operational efficiency.
Analyses, Guides, Industry News to Your Inbox
PoW, which forms the backbone of networks like Bitcoin and early-era Ethereum, bases its security on the competition of immense computational power. Although this model has proven its security to date, it comes at a significant cost.
In PoW, a transaction is not considered "final" the moment it is included in a block. As more blocks are added on top of it, the probability of the transaction being reversed decreases logarithmically. We can liken this to the foundation of a building: with each new floor added, the foundation becomes more secure. However, a sufficiently large "earthquake" (a network reorganization or a 51% attack) could theoretically shake this structure. For financial institutions and legal systems, practices like waiting for "six confirmations" mitigate risk but do not eliminate it. This situation raises critical legal questions:
The Moment of Title Transfer: When is the title of a high-value digital asset (e.g., a tokenized real estate property) legally considered transferred? Upon the first block confirmation, the sixth, or the hundredth? This ambiguity presents an unacceptable risk for transactions like title deeds, which require instant and absolute finality.
The Moment of Contract Performance: If a smart contract is programmed to trigger another action upon the "finality" of a specific transaction, which moment is the trigger? In the event of a potential block reorganization, what would be the legal validity of the triggered action?
PoW's low transaction throughput (TPS) and high energy consumption make it inefficient for global-scale applications. Furthermore, the growing environmental, social, and governance (ESG) concerns in recent years have caused PoW-based projects to face legal and reputational risks in the eyes of investors and regulators.
Discover our auditing and analysis services to eliminate risks like probabilistic finality and guarantee the immutability of your contracts.
PoS offers an elegant solution to the energy problem by shifting consensus from computational power to economic power (stake). Security is based on the risk that validators will lose their deposited collateral (stake) through "slashing" if they act maliciously. This model is far more efficient and faster than PoW, but it bases its trust on a different set of assumptions.
The core assumption in PoS is that validators will always act rationally in their own economic self-interest. This model is based on human behavior and market conditions. However, this is a powerful economic theory, not a cryptographic proof. In the face of extraordinary market conditions, sophisticated cyber-attacks, or interventions by state-level actors, this assumption of economic rationality could be challenged.
Legal systems make a clear distinction between preventing a crime and imposing a deterrent penalty after a crime has been committed. The "slashing" mechanism in PoS is a tool of deterrence; it punishes a rule violation. However, it does not prevent the violation from occurring in the first place. In a mathematical system, a rule-breaking action is, by definition, impossible. This is the difference between saying, "if you steal, you will go to jail," and designing a room where theft is physically impossible.
PoS systems, which can be susceptible to "the rich get richer" critiques, may lead to actors with large amounts of assets (staking pools, exchanges) having a disproportionate influence over the network. This creates centralization risks that could attract the attention of regulators from an antitrust and competition law perspective.
In conclusion, however innovative the current paradigms may be, by basing trust on either probabilities or economic assumptions, they leave a legal and operational "gray area."
To eliminate this gray area, POAR does not simply offer a "better" version of the existing model; it fundamentally changes the rules of the game. It grounds its consensus in mathematical certainty through a mechanism it calls Zero-Knowledge Proof of Validity (ZK-PoV).
POAR's revolutionary approach is an engineering marvel, bringing together the industry's most advanced cryptographic tools.
POAR utilizes the Groth16 algorithm for its validity proofs. Groth16 is a type of zk-SNARK (Zero-Knowledge Succinct Non-Interactive Argument of Knowledge). The key word here is "Succinct." This means that no matter how many complex transactions are in a block (e.g., 10,000 transactions), the generated validity proof has a fixed and tiny size (approximately 192 bytes). These proofs are generated on the BLS12-381 pairing-friendly curve, which is the industry standard. As a result, a node on the network only needs to verify this 192-byte proof instead of reprocessing the entire block.
However, this technical efficiency comes with a trade-off: the requirement of a "Trusted Setup." This situation creates significant legal liability and risk. What are the legal statuses and obligations of the actors participating in this setup ceremony? The transparency and verifiability of the process will determine who is held responsible in a potential case of negligence.
POAR's plan, stated in its whitepaper, to migrate to STARKs in the future (which do not require a trusted setup and are quantum-resistant) is not just a technical upgrade; it is a matter of legal "foresight" and a "long-term risk hedging" strategy. This plan is significant evidence that the project is prepared for future technological and legal threats.
A "Trusted Setup" is a ceremony where a group of actors generates the critical initial parameters for the system's security and destroys the "toxic waste" used in the process. If this waste is not destroyed, it could be used to generate fraudulent proofs. This situation creates significant legal liability and risk. What are the legal statuses and obligations of the actors participating in this setup ceremony? The transparency and verifiability of the process will determine who is held responsible in a potential case of negligence. A law firm like Genesis Law Firm can provide critical counsel to a project during such a process, managing risks, establishing legal safeguards, and placing the process within an auditable legal framework.
While traditional blockchains use hash functions like SHA-256, POAR opts for the Poseidon hash function. The reason is that Poseidon is specifically optimized to work within ZK circuits. Every operation in a ZK circuit creates a "constraint," and the fewer the constraints, the faster and cheaper the proof generation. Because Poseidon creates far fewer constraints than SHA-256, it provides a speed-up and efficiency gain of up to 10x in ZK proof generation. This is one of the key technical reasons why the protocol can offer block finality in seconds.
The fair selection of validators is critical for the decentralization of the network. POAR accomplishes this with a stake-weighted selection process using a Verifiable Random Function (VRF). A VRF is a cryptographic mechanism that allows a validator to generate a random number and prove to others that the number is genuinely random. This prevents manipulation of the validator selection process and creates a more equitable and predictable system from a legal standpoint.
The moment a block and its accompanying Groth16 proof are accepted by the POAR network, all transactions within that block are considered absolute, irreversible, and mathematically final. The technical infrastructure for this finality is as follows: any node on the network can take the 192-byte proof from an incoming block and verify its validity against the public verifying key in less than 50 milliseconds.
POAR offers a two-stage finality: Soft Finality, the cryptographic certainty achieved in approximately 2.4 seconds when a block's ZK proof is verified, and Hard Finality, the economic certainty achieved when economic penalties like slashing become active. This technical distinction requires us to reconsider fundamental concepts of Contract Law, such as "offer," "acceptance," and the "moment of contract formation." When is a smart contract transaction legally considered "finalized" and irrevocable? At the moment it is cryptographically verified, or at the moment it is economically secured?
This is not a probabilistic estimate; it is a cryptographic fact. This mathematical certainty is achieved within the total block time of approximately 2.4 seconds. This technical reality is a revolution, especially for domains that require instant settlement.
POAR's vision is not limited to transaction validation. Thanks to its integrated RISC Zero zkVM, it allows developers to generate ZK proofs that their programs—written in standard languages like Rust or C++—have executed correctly, without needing to write custom, complex ZK circuits. This is a concept known as "verifiable computation," which opens up entirely new application areas. While traditional blockchains require everything to be transparent, here, privacy is the default, and only the necessary information is selectively disclosed via a proof.
We offer user-centric solutions compliant with KVKK and global regulations for your Self-Sovereign Identity (SSI), DID, and tokenization projects.
When a technology, backed by cryptographic details, redefines the meaning of fundamental legal concepts such as "proof," "finality," "title," and "privacy," it ceases to be merely an engineering marvel and becomes the harbinger of a legal revolution.
Data protection laws like GDPR and KVKK are founded on principles such as "data minimization," "privacy by design," and "purpose limitation." While traditional, transparent blockchains struggle to comply with these principles, POAR's zkVM architecture implements them natively.
Instead of surrendering their identity to a centralized database, users can generate "zero-knowledge proofs" based on credentials held in their own digital wallets. Rather than sending a full copy of their driver's license to verify their age on an online platform, they can simply present a cryptographic proof stating, "I am over 18." This grants the user complete sovereignty over their data while freeing businesses from the liability and risk of collecting and storing unnecessary personal data.
We provide counsel to our clients utilizing this new technology not only to ensure compliance with existing regulations but also to design legal and operational models that turn privacy into a competitive advantage, center on user sovereignty, and are prepared for the future data economy.
Learn how you can maximize customer data protection while increasing KYC/AML compliance with Zero-Knowledge technology.
The phrase "Code is Law" has always remained theoretical in probabilistic systems. POAR's deterministic finality transforms this theory into a legal reality.
The moment of performance in a smart contract is now determined with undeniable certainty. This finality is based on a Groth16 proof generated by an OptimizedBlockValidityCircuit and verified by the network in under 50 milliseconds. This also means that the moment a counterparty is in default for non-performance becomes crystal clear. This clarity has the potential to eliminate disputes and litigation in numerous fields, from automated insurance policies to supply chain financing.
When the transfer of a tokenized asset occurs irreversibly as soon as it is mathematically proven, the legal uncertainty surrounding the transfer of title is completely eliminated. This is a vital guarantee, especially for the digital representation of high-value assets such as works of art, real estate, and company shares.
Financial regulators aim to prevent illicit activities through rules like Anti-Money Laundering (AML) and Know Your Customer (KYC). POAR's RISC Zero zkVM and batch processing capabilities change this equation.
A financial institution, after processing thousands of transactions, can generate a single BatchProofCircuit proof attesting that all of these transactions comply with AML/KYC regulations. A regulator can verify this single proof to confirm the compliance of the entire batch, but without ever accessing the private data of individual customers or transactions. This opens the door to a new field known as "privacy-preserving compliance." Genesis Law Firm provides strategic legal support to financial technology companies in designing these innovative compliance models and engaging in dialogue with regulatory bodies.
Manage your project's legal compliance and licensing processes in Turkey and internationally from the very beginning with a sound strategy.
POAR considers not only today's security threats but also tomorrow's. This is critical, especially for intellectual property rights that hold long-term value.
Quantum computers have the potential to break today's standard signature algorithms (like ECDSA). To counter this existential threat, POAR integrates Falcon, a post-quantum signature algorithm endorsed by NIST (the U.S. National Institute of Standards and Technology). Although Falcon signatures (approx. 666 bytes) are larger than their classical counterparts, this is a deliberate engineering trade-off. The goal is not size optimization but to provide long-term, unquestionable security against quantum attacks for digital assets and intellectual property rights that will retain their value for decades.
POAR's zkVM allows two companies to perform a joint computation using their trade secrets (e.g., proprietary algorithms) and prove the correctness of the result, all without disclosing the secrets to each other. This paves the way for new, trustless models for corporate collaboration without the need for legally complex Non-Disclosure Agreements (NDAs).
POAR utilizes a stake-based validator system and a slashing mechanism to punish erroneous or malicious behavior and ensure network security. According to the formula specified in the whitepaper, a portion of a validator's stake is deducted based on the severity of the violation.
What is the legal nature of this "slashing" mechanism? Is it a "penalty clause" agreed upon by the parties in advance? Or is it a sui generis sanction through which the network self-regulates? The legal status of validators is also critical here. Are these actors independent parties providing a service to the network, or are they integral components of the network, subject to its rules? If this system is governed by a Decentralized Autonomous Organization (DAO) in the future, who will be liable for damages arising from a slashing decision? The DAO itself, the members who voted, or the developers who wrote the code? These questions will be critical in defining the legal liability framework for decentralized structures.
We prepare fair, transparent, and legally robust governance models and constitutions for DAOs and other decentralized structures.
Visionary projects like POAR are transforming not only the world of technology but also the millennia-old concepts that form the bedrock of law. We are advancing toward a future where certainty replaces probability, verifiable privacy replaces blind transparency, and mathematical proof replaces economic assumptions. Mastering the technical details of this transformation is not an option; it is a necessity for architecting the legal strategies of the future.
In this new era, the role of the jurist is also transforming. We must no longer be mere interpreters and enforcers of existing laws, but the architects who design, foresee, and build the legal frameworks for this new reality created by technologies like Groth16, Poseidon, and Falcon.
We at Genesis Law Firm are positioned at the forefront of this new legal era. By reading the future of technology and understanding its technical foundations today, we empower our clients to innovate and grow with confidence in this complex and exciting domain.
To build your project's legal infrastructure on the principles of mathematical certainty and verifiable privacy, to be prepared for the regulations of tomorrow, today, and to unlock the full potential of your technology with legal assurance—contact our expert team.
