Menese Protocol has released an open-source upgrade for that connects the privacy network’s Enigma engine with threshold cryptography from the ecosystem.
The upgrade allows CloakCoin’s privacy mixing system to use the same chain-key cryptography that powers cross-chain features on the network.
According to the Menese team, the new version removes the need for a single machine to hold a user’s private key during the transaction mixing process. Instead, signing is handled through ICP’s threshold signature system, where a private key is split across multiple nodes rather than stored in one place.
The upgrade focuses on CloakCoin’s Enigma protocol, which was first introduced in 2014 as a privacy mixing system similar to CoinJoin. Under the older setup, the CloakCoin daemon coordinated the transaction, held the wallet and signed on behalf of the sender. Menese has separated those roles so the daemon now acts as a coordinator while signing takes place externally through an ICP canister using threshold ECDSA.
The result is that users can take part in privacy mixing without giving one device full control over their private keys. Menese said the final transaction still looks the same on-chain, meaning outside observers would not be able to tell whether the signing came from a traditional wallet or an ICP threshold signature setup.
The project is also another example of how ICP’s chain-key cryptography is being used outside its own ecosystem. Threshold signatures have already been used for assets such as ckBTC and ckETH, allowing applications on ICP to interact with other blockchains without relying on traditional bridges or centralised custodians.
Menese Protocol has been building multichain infrastructure around ICP, including support for more than 50 blockchain networks and sovereign wallet systems. The team says the CloakCoin upgrade shows how privacy-focused chains can also use ICP cryptography to improve wallet security and automate multichain activity.
Supporters of privacy tools are likely to see the move as a useful technical improvement, particularly as more users look for ways to reduce reliance on centralised services and single points of failure.
At the same time, privacy-focused crypto tools continue to face scrutiny from regulators and law enforcement agencies, especially when they make it harder to trace the movement of funds. Whether systems like this gain wider adoption may depend on how privacy networks balance stronger user protection with growing compliance pressure.
Dear Reader,
Ledger Life is an independent platform dedicated to covering the Internet Computer (ICP) ecosystem and beyond. We focus on real stories, builder updates, project launches, and the quiet innovations that often get missed.
We’re not backed by sponsors. We rely on readers like you.
If you find value in what we publish—whether it’s deep dives into dApps, explainers on decentralised tech, or just keeping track of what’s moving in Web3—please consider making a donation. It helps us cover costs, stay consistent, and remain truly independent.
Your support goes a long way.
🧠 ICP Principal: ins6i-d53ug-zxmgh-qvum3-r3pvl-ufcvu-bdyon-ovzdy-d26k3-lgq2v-3qe
🧾 ICP Address: f8deb966878f8b83204b251d5d799e0345ea72b8e62e8cf9da8d8830e1b3b05f
Every contribution helps keep the lights on, the stories flowing, and the crypto clutter out.
Thank you for reading, sharing, and being part of this experiment in decentralised media.
—Team Ledger Life
Community Discussion