The Social Mask

[Emilio983]

level: "2"
project_name: "The Social Mask - Privacy-Preserving Journalist Identity on Substrate"

Project Abstract

Social Mask is a privacy-first, censorship-resistant publishing layer that enables journalists, whistleblowers, and citizens to share sensitive information safely. The product offers anonymous submissions, authenticated-but-private posting, and verifiable distribution while minimizing metadata leakage.

With this grant we will integrate Polkadot tech to harden security and reliability: use AssetHub for on-chain payouts (USDC & DOT) tied to milestone bounties, and build a Substrate-based service that manages attestations (content proofs and reputation signals) without exposing user identities. The result is a robust pipeline for safe reporting and community curation, suitable for high-risk contexts.

Grant level

• Level 1: Up to $10,000, 2 approvals
• Level 2: Up to $30,000, 3 approvals
• Level 3: Unlimited, 5 approvals (for >$100k: Web3 Foundation Council approval)

Application Checklist

• The application template has been copied and aptly renamed (applications/social-mask.md).
• I have read the application guidelines.
• Payment details have been provided (Polkadot AssetHub (USDC & DOT) address in the application and bank details via email, if applicable).
• I understand that an agreed upon percentage of each milestone will be paid in vested DOT, to the Polkadot address listed in the application.
• I am aware that, in order to receive a grant, I (and the entity I represent) have to successfully complete a KYC/KYB check.
• The software delivered for this grant will be released under an open-source license specified in the application.
• The initial PR contains only one commit (squash and force-push if needed).
• The grant will only be announced once the first milestone has been accepted (see the announcement guidelines).
• I prefer the discussion of this application to take place in a private Element/Matrix channel. My username is: @Emilio983:matrix.org (change the homeserver if you use a different one)

[github-actions]

CLA Assistant Lite bot All contributors have signed the CLA ✍️ ✅

[Emilio983]

I have read and hereby sign the Contributor License Agreement.

[diogo-w3f]

@Emilio983 thanks for applying. Could you please adjust your application to comply with our template. Here are the changes needed. I understand that maybe you don't want to provide this information but we need it to evaluate the project.

• Payment Details still use placeholder text (“to be provided”); template requires concrete DOT and USDC AssetHub addresses.
• Contact Email missing; must supply a working address instead of “to be provided.”
• Team Member GitHub Accounts and Team LinkedIn Profiles sections list placeholders; replace with actual profile links or clearly state none exist.

Furthermore, can you take a read at our new guidelines and help us to outline how your application fits on it? How your application can help to increase the usage of DOT token?

[keeganquigley]

Hi @Emilio983 why geared toward only journalists and not a generalized solution beneficial to others who would also like to use this technology?

[Emilio983]

Hi @keeganquigley!

Honestly, this is one of the best questions I've gotten, and I've been thinking about this a lot.

You're totally right - this technology could benefit way more people than just journalists. We've actually analyzed this, and there are already several platforms claiming to provide privacy (most still ask for emails though). Our approach with passkeys means we literally can't track users even if we wanted to.

So why start with journalists specifically?

Real talk: it's a strategic decision. If we try to be "a generalized solution for everyone" from day one, we'll just end up being another crypto project that only crypto people use. And that's exactly what we're trying to avoid.

What we're proposing is to use cryptocurrency and take it OUT of that bubble, you know? Most crypto projects build for crypto users. We want to build something that regular people can actually use, and journalism is our entry point.

Here's our thinking:

1. Clear target market: Journalists in dangerous countries have a desperate, immediate need
2. Proven problem: I've attached links in the proposal to real cases - 1,200+ journalists killed in the last decade
3. Word of mouth: Journalists talk to other journalists. If we solve their problem well, they'll spread it
4. Then expand: Once we have that foothold, we can generalize to whistleblowers, hospital workers reporting medicine shortages, citizens documenting corruption, etc.

Like, the hospital example you mentioned - that's EXACTLY where we want to go. In fact, one of our use cases is literally a hospital worker who sees empty medicine shelves while the government says everything's fine. They're not a "journalist" but they need the same protection.

But if we launch saying "this is for everyone who wants to report anything," we won't establish ourselves anywhere. We need a beachhead, you know? Start with a specific urgent need, solve it really well, then expand.

Does that make sense? We're thinking journalists first, then expand to anyone who witnesses something critical and wants to report it safely.

Open to feedback on this approach though - what do you think?

[Emilio983]

Hi @diogo-w3f
Got it - thanks for the clear feedback! I've updated everything you mentioned:

✅ Payment addresses are now filled in (had placeholders initially for security paranoia lol, but I understand you need real addresses)
✅ Contact email is live: hi@socialmask.org
✅ GitHub/LinkedIn updated (or explained why we keep low profile given the journalism work)
✅ Added whole section on DOT token usage based on the new guidelines

Should be compliant now. Really appreciate you taking time to review this properly - your feedback helped me make the proposal way stronger.

Let me know if anything else needs adjustment!

[diogo-w3f]

@Emilio983 Thanks for the changes. The addresses are still missing, but we can move forward without them and complete that later if needed. I’ll mark the application as ready for review since it looks good in terms of format.

I have one question: in your proposal, you mention that journalists and media organizations will use DOT directly for transactions, staking, and governance within your parachain. Given that parachains on Polkadot define their own native tokens and cannot use DOT as their base currency, could you clarify how DOT would be integrated technically? For example, would it function as a foreign asset via XCM or through another mechanism?

If your intention is to use DOT as the native token, wouldn’t it be better to plan to launch the project as smart contracts on Asset Hub?

[diogo-w3f]

@Emilio983 can you mark your application as Level 2 since you are asking for 25,000 USD? Level 1 is up to 10k.

[semuelle]

Sorry, @Emilio983, it somehow slipped through the cracks that you would prefer the discussion to take place in a private chat room. I'm happy to create one, unless you are okay with us continuing the conversation here. Please let me know.

[keeganquigley]

Thanks for your answers @Emilio983 just in case you aren't aware, the DOT would be vested on-chain linearly for two years. Considering this are you still willing to be paid in 78% DOT?

[Emilio983]

If your intention is to use DOT as the native token, wouldn’t it be better to plan to launch the project as smart contracts on Asset Hub? @diogo-w3f

hey thanks for the clarification, that’s a really good point.
tbh right now we’re not planning to launch a full parachain with its own token. the idea is to first deploy our platform as a smart contract or dapp that can use DOT directly, probably through Asset Hub or maybe another parachain that already supports smart contracts.
later on if we move into our own chain, we’d integrate DOT through XCM as an external asset so everything stays interoperable across the Polkadot ecosystem.
this way we can keep things light, flexible and aligned with the current infra instead of making it more complex too early.

[Emilio983]

Thanks for your answers @Emilio983 just in case you aren't aware, the DOT would be vested on-chain linearly for two years. Considering this are you still willing to be paid in 78% DOT? @keeganquigley

hey yeah i thought about it and decided to make a small change. the payment split’s gonna be reversed, around 70% in USDC and the rest in DOT.
we actually wanted to go 50 50 but we don’t wanna risk running low on liquidity or having to wait too long to recover it. to hit that 50% mark we’d probably need to ask for a bit more overall just to stay safe and still be able to use the DOT we get gradually for hiring and improving strategies.
we don’t wanna over request funds either so we’ll keep it simple and go with 70% USDC and the rest in DOT.

[Emilio983]

Lo siento, de alguna manera se deslizó por las grietas que preferiría que la discusión tuviera lugar en una sala de chat privada. Estoy feliz de crear uno, a menos que esté de acuerdo con que continuemos la conversación aquí. Por favor, hágamelo saber. @semuelle

hey no worries i just had a quick question btw im not trying to rush or anything just wondering so i can get an idea when a project gets marked ready for review how long does it usually take before you guys decide if its likely to get the grant or not

[keeganquigley]

hey yeah i thought about it and decided to make a small change. the payment split’s gonna be reversed, around 70% in USDC and the rest in DOT. we actually wanted to go 50 50 but we don’t wanna risk running low on liquidity or having to wait too long to recover it. to hit that 50% mark we’d probably need to ask for a bit more overall just to stay safe and still be able to use the DOT we get gradually for hiring and improving strategies. we don’t wanna over request funds either so we’ll keep it simple and go with 70% USDC and the rest in DOT.

Sorry I should I have made it clear - at the minimum, 50% needs to be paid in DOT, see here. When you previously indicated 78% it was above this marker. That said, would you be okay with 50/50?

hey no worries i just had a quick question btw im not trying to rush or anything just wondering so i can get an idea when a project gets marked ready for review how long does it usually take before you guys decide if its likely to get the grant or not

Typically the process takes a few weeks, but we will mark it as ready for review as soon as the initial formatting changes have been made. Thanks!

[Emilio983]

Sorry I should I have made it clear - at the minimum, 50% needs to be paid in DOT, see here. When you previously indicated 78% it was above this marker. That said, would you be okay with 50/50?

okay no problem i totally understand thanks for letting me know i’ll make the changes in the doc and update the milestones to 50 and 50 appreciate the heads up