Roadmap

InVeil ships in two phases. Phase 1 is the mainnet launch you can use today, intentionally simple and intentionally centralized at the arbitration layer. Phase 2 is the decentralization rebuild — gated entirely on whether the platform reaches the user volume where a staked-juror pool can actually be random.

Phase 1 — Mainnet launch

Where we are right now. The full contract suite is live on Arbitrum One. Trading, escrow, partial settlement, and reputation work exactly as documented. Dispute resolution runs through the Senior Arbitration Committee — a fixed three-seat panel — and that's the only arbitration path that exists in this version. No L1–L3 levels, no commit-reveal voting, no on-chain appeals.

• Non-custodial from day one. Funds live in smart-contract custody. The vault has no admin-withdraw, no emergency drain, and withdraw() is always callable by you.
• Senior Committee arbitration only. Every dispute routes to the three-seat committee panel: 48-hour evidence window, 18-hour deliberation, binding on-chain ruling. See Arbitration for the full mechanics.
• Passkey onboarding. Face ID / Touch ID / Windows Hello for sign-in. No email, no seed phrase, no KYC.
• Aave yield on idle Trading balance. Your unlocked USDT supplies to Aave directly from your own smart account; you keep 100% of the interest.

Phase 1 is honest about what it is: a working P2P protocol with a centralized arbitration layer we picked over pretending a small staked pool is meaningfully decentralized. The committee is the founding team, personally accountable for every ruling. See Arbitration for the longer writeup on why we landed here.

Phase 2 — Inveil v2 (conditional on user growth)

What unlocks it. Decentralized arbitration is meaningful only when the staked-juror pool is large and diverse enough for random draws to actually be random. That requires a user base of a size we don't have today. We won't pretend otherwise, and we won't ship a "decentralized" layer that's small enough for a single juror to learn who the parties are just from the pattern of cases they're drawn into.

If — and when — InVeil reaches that scale, the plan is a ground-up rebuild as Inveil v2, with three concrete shifts:

• Rebuilt on Arbitrum Stylus. Stylus enables Rust-based execution on Arbitrum at meaningfully lower per-call cost than Solidity-only contracts. That cost headroom is what makes the cryptographic mechanisms below affordable.
• L1–L3 decentralized arbitration introduced. New disputes enter at L1 — a small panel drawn at random from a USDT-staked juror pool, voting under commit-reveal so jurors can't see each other's choices before locking their own. A losing party can appeal to L2 (larger panel) and L3 (larger still). The honest read of the evidence becomes the focal point — the Schelling point that random-draw arbitration is built on.
• L4 Senior Committee remains as the final-appeal seat. Decentralization doesn't mean the committee disappears. It retreats from being the default entry point to being the floor of the system — the backstop when three independent staked panels can't reach a coherent verdict.
• Stronger anonymity at the protocol layer. Stylus's execution-cost headroom lets us afford deeper zero-knowledge mechanisms in the evidence path and stronger commit-reveal hiding than what was feasible under the Solidity-only stack.

Phase 2 is a real plan, but it isn't a dated commitment. The gating condition is user growth, not a calendar.

What does not change across phases

• Non-custodial. Funds live in the smart contract custody from the first deposit onward. No phase changes this.
• No KYC. Signing in with a passkey, never an ID-and-account, holds across all phases.
• Operator anonymity. Every paid infrastructure dependency in the production path accepts crypto, so operating the platform never requires disclosing identity to a fiat-rails counterparty. This stance is structural, not a phase milestone.