Ethereum Co-Founder Vitalik Buterin Backs Tornado Cash Developer Amid Legal Controversy

Vitalik Buterin, co-founder of Ethereum, has publicly endorsed Roman Storm, the lead developer of Tornado Cash, amid the latter’s ongoing legal case. Storm was convicted in August 2025 for operating an unlicensed money transmitting business and faces a potential prison sentence of up to five years. The case has sparked a broader debate about the role of privacy tools in blockchain ecosystems.

Buterin’s support of Storm highlights his belief that privacy tools are not inherently criminal but are essential for protecting individuals from digital surveillance. In a personal letter, Buterin urged the crypto community to advocate for developers who face legal risks for creating tools with privacy-focused functionalities.

The Tornado Cash platform, co-founded by Storm, uses zero-knowledge proofs to obscure transaction details and protect user anonymity. The U.S. Treasury sanctioned the platform in 2022, alleging it facilitated money laundering and was used by criminal organizations, including North Korean hackers. Storm’s defense has focused on the platform’s legitimate privacy applications and the limitations of holding developers accountable for how their software is used.

The legal proceedings against Storm have raised complex questions about developer liability in decentralized software. The jury deadlocked on money laundering and sanctions-related charges, leading to a partial acquittal. The court denied pre-sentencing detention, with Judge Katherine Polk Failla citing Storm’s compliance and low flight risk. This case is being closely watched by both the crypto industry and legal experts for its potential to set precedents in developer accountability and the regulation of decentralized applications.

Buterin has long argued that privacy is a fundamental right in the digital age. In his letter, he emphasized that the commodification of personal data and online surveillance are growing concerns, and privacy tools serve as a necessary safeguard. This perspective aligns with his broader vision for Ethereum as a platform for decentralized finance, identity, and governance, where users maintain full control over their data and transactions.

The outcome of Storm’s sentencing and the ongoing legal discussions could have significant implications for the development of privacy-preserving technologies. If developers are held criminally liable for their work, it may discourage innovation in the privacy space and lead to increased self-censorship. Conversely, a favorable ruling could reinforce the legitimacy of privacy tools and encourage their adoption.

Regulators and lawmakers are still navigating the balance between preventing financial crime and preserving individual privacy. The Tornado Cash case is a prime example of this tension, as it challenges traditional notions of liability in the context of decentralized systems. The crypto industry is waiting to see how this case will influence future regulatory approaches, particularly as more decentralized applications emerge.

Buterin’s public support for Storm underscores the philosophical and practical divides within the crypto community. While some argue that privacy tools can be misused for illicit purposes, others maintain that such tools are essential for protecting individual autonomy and digital rights. The legal outcome of this case will likely shape the ongoing debate about the role of privacy in decentralized finance.

In parallel, the broader Ethereum ecosystem continues to evolve. Buterin has drawn comparisons between Ethereum and the Linux operating system, emphasizing the platform’s role as a decentralized infrastructure for value transfer and risk management. This analogy reflects Ethereum’s long-term goals of becoming a foundational layer for decentralized applications, where users can operate without reliance on intermediaries.

As the legal case against Roman Storm unfolds, the broader implications for privacy tools and decentralized development remain uncertain. The crypto industry and regulators are closely monitoring this case as a potential turning point in the regulation of decentralized technologies.