According to @muneeb, Bitcoin will likely never add privacy at the base layer, placing future privacy features on BTC L2s instead. source: @muneeb He states that if BTC on L2 is fully self-custodial and the L2 offers a full VM, stealth BTC addresses can be implemented at the L2 level. source: @muneeb He adds that information leakage occurs when bridging, but moving from a public L1 address to a stealth L2 address also leaks data, with the design keeping the public address on L1 and the stealth address on L2. source: @muneeb He identifies the core technical hurdle as guaranteeing fully self-custodial L2 BTC so users can always reclaim BTC even if the L2 fails. source: @muneeb He concludes that once fully self-custodial, programmable BTC on L2 exists, a new privacy design space opens, positioning BTC privacy as an L2-driven narrative for traders to track. source: @muneeb

According to @muneeb, Bitcoin will likely never add privacy at the base layer, so privacy features like stealth BTC addresses should be built on Layer-2s such as Stacks if the L2 is fully self-custodial (source: @muneeb on X, Nov 17, 2025). According to @muneeb, information can leak both when crossing a bridge and when moving funds from a public address to a stealth address, and he proposes a design with the public address on L1 and the stealth address on L2 (source: @muneeb on X, Nov 17, 2025). According to @muneeb, the hard technical requirement is a fully self-custodial L2 BTC model that guarantees users can always retrieve their BTC even if the L2 fails (source: @muneeb on X, Nov 17, 2025). According to @muneeb, he is actively working on this approach to enable stealth BTC addresses on an L2 like Stacks (source: @muneeb on X, Nov 17, 2025).