DEANONYMIZATION PROBLEMS AND LEGAL LIMITATIONS IN CRIMES RELATED TO CRYPTO-ASSETS
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.19722526Keywords:
deanonymization, crypto-assets, blockchain analytics, pseudonymity, privacy, AML/CFT, FATF Travel Rule, MiCA, international law, Uzbekistan.Abstract
This article examines the technical and legal dimensions of deanonymization in crypto-asset crime investigations. Using a comparative-legal and systematic analysis methodology, the study analyzes core blockchain analytics methods, international and regional regulatory frameworks governing deanonymization, and the fundamental tensions between public security imperatives and individual rights. The results reveal significant structural gaps — particularly concerning unhosted wallets, privacy-enhancing technologies, and cross-border cooperation mechanisms — and show that existing frameworks are unevenly implemented across jurisdictions. The discussion proposes a rights-respecting framework grounded in the principles of legality, necessity, proportionality, and judicial oversight, with specific recommendations for legislative modernization, standardization of forensic evidence methodology, and strengthened international cooperation. The relevance of these findings for Uzbekistan's ongoing regulatory harmonization is addressed.
References
Ante, L., & Fiedler, I. (2022). Blockchain anonymity and the challenges of detecting illicit financial flows. ResearchGate. https://doi.org/10.13140/RG.2.2.24082.89284
Basel Institute on Governance. (2023). Challenges in prosecuting crypto-related crimes: Q&A with Shenaz Muzaffer. https://baselgovernance.org/blog/challenges-prosecuting-crypto-related-crimes-qa-shenaz-muzaffer
Chainalysis. (2024). The Chainalysis crypto crime report 2024. Chainalysis Inc.
Council of Europe. (2022). Second additional protocol to the Budapest Convention on cybercrime (CETS No. 224). https://www.coe.int/en/web/cybercrime/t-cy-budapest-convention-second-additional-protocol
Deuber, D., Gruber, J., Humml, M., Ronge, V., & Scheler, N. (2024). Argumentation schemes for blockchain deanonymisation. Forensic Sciences, 3(2), 14. https://doi.org/10.3390/forensicsci3020014
Dupont, Q., & Maurer, B. (2015). Ledgers and law in the blockchain. Kings Review Magazine.
European Parliament and Council. (2023). Regulation (EU) 2023/1114 on markets in crypto-assets (MiCA). Official Journal of the European Union.
European Parliament and Council. (2024). Regulation (EU) 2024/1624 on anti-money laundering (AMLR). Official Journal of the European Union.
Financial Action Task Force. (2021a). Updated guidance for a risk-based approach to virtual assets and virtual asset service providers. FATF.
Financial Action Task Force. (2021b). FATF Recommendation 16: Travel Rule — revised guidance. FATF.
Financial Crime Academy. (2023). Cryptocurrency and financial crimes: Challenges and legal implications. https://financialcrimeacademy.org/cryptocurrency-and-financial-crimes-challenges-and-legal-implications/
Freeman Law. (2023). Legal issues surrounding cryptocurrency. https://freemanlaw.com/legal-issues-surrounding-cryptocurrency/
Goodison, S. E., Woods, D., & Jackson, B. A. (2022). Cryptocurrency and blockchain needs for law enforcement (Research Report RRA108-17). RAND Corporation. https://doi.org/10.7249/RRA108-17
lawgratis.com. (2025). Travel rule compliance crypto. https://lawgratis.com/blog-detail/travel-rule-compliance-crypto
Meiklejohn, S., Pomarole, M., Jordan, G., Levchenko, K., McCoy, D., Voelker, G. M., & Savage, S. (2013). A fistful of Bitcoins: Characterizing payments among men with no names. Proceedings of the 2013 Internet Measurement Conference (pp. 127–140). ACM. https://doi.org/10.1145/2504730.2504747
Van Saberhagen, N. (2013). CryptoNote v2.0 [Monero whitepaper]. CryptoNote Technology. https://static.coinpaprika.com/storage/cdn/whitepapers/1611930.pdf
