Skip to main content

zKML

zKML — a reference card for a crypto project: what the product does and how verifiable the project’s key claims are; also — alignment with the Decentralized AI thesis (DecAI Fit).

zKML — a privacy‑first set of applications (anonymous browser/search, messaging, private swaps) with the ZKML token on Ethereum.

Disclaimer

Important: this page is a reference overview of the project. Within DecAIHub, we separately record a verification based on open sources within the AI thesis (what is real AI/onchain/why a token, and which sources this is based on).
This is not financial advice and not a recommendation to buy/sell/hold any asset. We do not assess price, returns, or entry/exit timing.
Conclusions are based on publicly available materials found as of the verification date. The absence of confirmation does not imply the absence of the technology.

TL;DR (for readers who are not into AI)

  • What it is: an ecosystem of privacy applications (anonymous browsing/search, messaging, swaps) with additional AI features (for example, an AI summary in the browser).
  • Who it’s for: users who value privacy in their web/crypto activities.
  • What you can actually touch (Tier‑1): ZkSearch (see links_* → App / Demo and the product page in the docs).
  • Why onchain/token: the ZKML token is used as the ecosystem’s utility asset (discounts/perks; buyback & burn from revenue — per the claims in the docs).

How it works (very briefly)

  1. The user does: uses the zKML applications (for example, ZkSearch for browsing/search).
  2. The system does: routes traffic through Anon Network/proxies (per the description), provides private search and (optionally) an AI summary of the results.
  3. The user gets: private access to the web/search and a set of privacy tools.
  4. Where the blockchain is: the ZKML token — onchain on Ethereum; the rest of the applications’ functionality — mostly offchain (clients/proxies/services).
  5. Token role: the docs claim fee discounts/utility and buyback & burn from product revenue; the token being mandatory for the basic operation of the applications is not proven.

Quick links: AI thesis fit

Project passport

Field Value
Project name zKML
Also known as (aliases) ZKML; $ZKML; ZkSearch; Zebra; ZWAP; Zebra AI
Logo (logo) ../assets/160_zkml_logo.webp
Token symbol (ticker) ZKML
Category AI/Tools | Privacy | Apps
Primary chain (chain) Ethereum
Type EVM
Network status mainnet
Consensus (consensus) PoS (Ethereum)
Launch date (launch_date) 2024 (in the docs: “Since launching in early 2024…”)
Project status (status) active
Token (standard) ERC-20
Token contract 0xE92344b4eDF545F3209094B192E46600A19E7C2D
Token model (token_type) utility (fee-mechanism)
Max supply 100,000,000 ZKML (Etherscan and the docs)
Issuance fixed + buyback & burn (per the docs; needs to be matched with onchain transactions)
Tokenomics (tokenomics, brief) 2% tax buy / 5% tax sell (per the docs); liquidity is claimed to be “locked until 2027”; buyback & burn from revenue is claimed
Governance owner‑admin (the contract has owner() and a set of onlyOwner functions — per the code on Etherscan)
Admins/keys there is an owner and admin functions (fees/blacklist/limits) → centralized control at the token contract level
Audit — (on Etherscan: “No Contract Security Audit Submitted”)
Bug bounty —
Team (team) —
Funding (investors/funding) —
AI component (ai_component) AI summary in ZkSearch; Zebra AI API
Use‑case (use_case) privacy apps + anonymous search/browser
DecAI Fit — AI thesis fit 3/6 — medium alignment with the Decentralized AI thesis
DecAI Fit component summary 2 / 1 / 0 / 3
Last verified 2026-02-11

General project overview

zKML describes itself as a privacy‑first ecosystem: “messaging, swapping, search, or AI” — with a focus on anonymity, security and “accountless access” (per their GitBook).

From the public product pages, it is evident that at least one product — ZkSearch — is positioned as an anonymous browser/search with traffic routing through Anon Network and a private AI summary of results (the document explicitly names the provider venice.ai).

Features/modules

  • ZkSearch: a private browser/search, Anon routing, “Private AI Summary (venice.ai)”.
  • Zebra: an “encrypted, wallet‑optional messaging app” (per the description on the “What we do” page).
  • ZWAP: a “cross‑chain private swap engine” (per the description on “What we do”).
  • Zebra AI / AI API layer: claimed as a “privacy‑preserving AI and API layer (in progress)”.

Typical scenarios

  • Scenario 1: a user opens ZkSearch → gets private browsing/search with proxy routing.
  • Scenario 2: a user enables the AI summary in ZkSearch → gets a brief AI summary (in the docs: via venice.ai).

Getting started (wallet/network)

  • What you need: for the products (for example, ZkSearch) — the app/browser; for the onchain part — an EVM wallet to store ZKML.
  • Network/chain: Ethereum mainnet for the ZKML token.
  • Fees: Ethereum gas for token operations; the docs claim BUY/SELL taxes on the token (at the token contract level).

Architecture/tech (non‑AI)

  • Components: the ZKML token contract (Ethereum); client applications (ZkSearch/Zebra); proxies/routing via Anon Network (as claimed).
  • Participant roles: application users; token holders; the team/infrastructure operator (proxies/applications).
  • Where logic runs: privacy/search/AI summary functionality — offchain; onchain — the token and its parameters.
  • Dependencies: Ethereum; an external network/providers for Anon routing; for the AI summary in ZkSearch, venice.ai is explicitly named.

Token/economics (expanded, no forecasts)

  • Token utility: the docs claim a “fee reduction” in ZWAP for holders and “Zebra AI API access”; a revenue‑backed buyback & burn mechanism is also described.
  • Protocol necessity drivers: in the reviewed Tier‑1 sources, the token is not shown as mandatory for the basic use of ZkSearch; rather, these are perks/discounts/possible access to individual features.
  • Who pays fees: token users — Ethereum gas; at the token level there are BUY/SELL taxes (per the docs: 2% buy / 5% sell).
  • Where fees go: the docs state that the taxes go to development/marketing/events; buyback & burn from product revenue is also claimed.
  • Issuance/burn: supply 100M; deflation via buyback & burn is claimed; the docs provide a link to an Etherscan address/filter for observing burn transactions.
  • Incentive mechanisms: direct staking/slashing is not described on the reviewed pages.
  • Distribution/vesting: the docs state that liquidity is “locked until 2027”; the distribution of tokens by category is not provided on the reviewed pages.

Governance

  • Who makes decisions: for the token — the contract owner manages the parameters (fees/limits/blacklist) via onlyOwner functions (per the code on Etherscan).
  • Keys/multisig: no data on multisig/timelock was found in the reviewed Tier‑1 sources.

Security and incidents

  • Audits: on Etherscan for the token — “No Contract Security Audit Submitted”.
  • Bug bounty: not found.
  • Threat model (brief): centralized control of the token parameters (owner, blacklist) + the applications’ dependency on infrastructure/proxies and third‑party AI providers.

Project status and timeline

  • Current status: the ZKML token — Ethereum mainnet; ZkSearch is described as available on web/mobile; some components are marked as “in progress”.
  • Roadmap: https://zkml-1.gitbook.io/zkml/overview/roadmap

Ecosystem/integrations

  • Integrations (per the docs): Anon Network (routing) and a third‑party AI provider for the AI summary in ZkSearch (venice.ai).

AI component of the project

  • What is real AI here? ZkSearch claims a “Private AI Summary (venice.ai)” feature. At the top level of the ecosystem, a “Zebra AI API layer” (in progress) is also claimed.
  • What is truly onchain? The ZKML token (ERC‑20) and its parameters (supply/fees) on Ethereum; observation of burn transactions is provided via links to Etherscan.
  • Why is a token needed? The docs claim discounts/perks and a link between product revenue and buyback & burn. A mandatory role of the token for the basic operation of the applications is not proven in the reviewed sources.
  • Red flags (based on the information found): AI‑washing (the AI features look like an integration of a third‑party provider, without metrics or technical details); onchain‑washing (the applications and privacy work offchain); token‑washing (utility in the form of discounts/perks and buyback could be implemented without its own token as well). Double‑check: which features actually require ZKML; who controls the owner keys/blacklist; the actual buyback/burn transactions and their correspondence to the claimed “revenue sources”.

DecAI Fit component summary

  • DecAI Fit: 3/6 — medium alignment with the Decentralized AI thesis
Component Level Score
AI reality medium 2
Onchain necessity low 1
Token necessity low 0
Evidence Tier‑1 present 3
Details

AI reality

AI_0 — AI intent (Tier‑1 roadmap) (1/0)

  • AI_0 (decision): 0
  • Claim (one line): AI features are described as already available (AI summary) or as “in progress” at the level of specific products, not only as an abstract plan.
  • Evidence: Tier‑1 — https://zkml-1.gitbook.io/zkml/products/zksearch ; https://zkml-1.gitbook.io/zkml/overview/what-we-do
  • Why sufficient / why not (one line): AI_0 applies when there is only an intent without working functionality; here there is described AI summary functionality.
  • Conflict note (if any): —

AI_1 — what the AI does (1/0)

  • AI_1 (decision): 1
  • Claim (one line): ZkSearch provides a “Private AI Summary” of results/content (the docs name venice.ai).
  • Evidence: Tier‑1 — https://zkml-1.gitbook.io/zkml/products/zksearch
  • Why sufficient / why not (one line): Tier‑1 describes a specific AI feature (summary) and the provider.
  • Conflict note (if any): the AI feature looks like an integration of a third‑party provider (not an “own model”).

AI_2 — demos/examples (1/0)

  • AI_2 (decision): 1
  • Claim (one line): ZkSearch is described as an available product (web/Android/iOS) with AI output/summary.
  • Evidence: Tier‑1 — https://zkml-1.gitbook.io/zkml/products/zksearch
  • Why sufficient / why not (one line): the existence of a publicly described and distributed product with an AI feature is sufficient as a “demo/example” at the product level.
  • Conflict note (if any): —

AI_3 — metrics/quality (1/0)

  • AI_3 (decision): 0
  • Metrics: —
  • Context (version/date/how measured): —
  • Evidence: Tier‑1 — —
  • Why sufficient / why not (one line): quality metrics for the AI summary/AI layer were not found in Tier‑1 sources.
  • Conflict note (if any): —

AI_4 — tech description/architecture/versions (1/0)

  • AI_4 (decision): 0
  • Claim (one line): there is no technical description of the model/architecture of the AI part; it is only stated that the summary uses venice.ai.
  • Evidence: Tier‑1 — https://zkml-1.gitbook.io/zkml/products/zksearch
  • Why sufficient / why not (one line): AI_4 requires a description of an own model/architecture, which is absent.
  • Conflict note (if any): —

Onchain necessity

OC_1 — contracts/addresses/chain (1/0)

  • OC_1 (decision): 1
  • Chain: Ethereum
  • Addresses/identifiers: token contract 0xE92344b4eDF545F3209094B192E46600A19E7C2D
  • Evidence: Tier‑1 — https://etherscan.io/token/0xe92344b4edf545f3209094b192e46600a19e7c2d
  • Why sufficient / why not (one line): the token contract and supply are verifiable onchain.
  • Conflict note (if any): —

OC_2 — onchain beyond just a token (1/0)

  • OC_2 (decision): 0
  • What useful logic is onchain: no protocol‑level onchain logic was found in the reviewed sources (other than the token/its fee mechanics).
  • Evidence: Tier‑1 — https://etherscan.io/token/0xe92344b4edf545f3209094b192e46600a19e7c2d
  • Why sufficient / why not (one line): the described privacy products and AI summary operate as applications/infrastructure, not as an onchain protocol.
  • Conflict note (if any): —

OC_3 — onchain is critical (1/0)

  • OC_3 (decision): 0
  • “Replace the blockchain” test: privacy applications can work without a blockchain; the docs contain no justification that the blockchain is critical for the core function (anonymous browsing/search).
  • Evidence: Tier‑1 — https://zkml-1.gitbook.io/zkml/overview/what-we-do
  • Why sufficient / why not (one line): the absence of a strict argument that “without the blockchain, a key property breaks down”.
  • Conflict note (if any): —

Token necessity

TK_0 — no token (1/0)

  • TK_0 (decision): 0
  • Claim (one line): the project has a token, ZKML (ERC‑20 on Ethereum).
  • Evidence: Tier‑1 — https://zkml-1.gitbook.io/zkml/overview/tokenomics ; https://etherscan.io/token/0xe92344b4edf545f3209094b192e46600a19e7c2d
  • Why sufficient / why not (one line): the supply and the contract are specified in the docs and confirmed by Etherscan.
  • Conflict note (if any): —

TK_1..TK_4 (1/0)

TK_1 — payment for the service (1/0)

  • TK_1 (decision): 0
  • Claim (one line): mandatory payment for services in the ZKML token is not proven in the reviewed Tier‑1 sources.
  • Evidence: Tier‑1 — https://zkml-1.gitbook.io/zkml/overview/usdzkml-utility
  • Why sufficient / why not (one line): discounts/access/buyback‑burn are described, but not a mandatory payment rail.
  • Conflict note (if any): —

TK_2 — incentives/collateral/penalties (1/0)

  • TK_2 (decision): 0
  • Claim (one line): staking/slashing/collateral mechanics are not described in the reviewed Tier‑1 sources.
  • Evidence: Tier‑1 — —
  • Why sufficient / why not (one line): there is buyback & burn, but that is not incentives/collateral at the protocol level in the sense of TK_2.
  • Conflict note (if any): —

TK_3 — governance (1/0)

  • TK_3 (decision): 0
  • Claim (one line): governance via the token is not described in the reviewed sources.
  • Evidence: Tier‑1 — —
  • Why sufficient / why not (one line): there is no description of a DAO/voting.
  • Conflict note (if any): —

TK_4 — token is replaceable (1/0)

  • TK_4 (decision): 1
  • Claim (one line): the described utilities (discounts/perks, buyback & burn) could be implemented without its own token (via a subscription/points/a stablecoin).
  • Evidence: Tier‑1 — https://zkml-1.gitbook.io/zkml/overview/usdzkml-utility
  • Why sufficient / why not (one line): Tier‑1 does not show a property that requires specifically ZKML as an irreplaceable asset.
  • Conflict note (if any): —

Evidence (table)

Tier Source What it proves
Tier‑1 https://zkml-1.gitbook.io/zkml/overview/what-we-do description of the ecosystem and the claimed products (Zebra/ZkSearch/ZWAP/Zebra AI)
Tier‑1 https://zkml-1.gitbook.io/zkml/products/zksearch description of ZkSearch, Anon routing and the AI summary (venice.ai), links to the apps
Tier‑1 https://zkml-1.gitbook.io/zkml/overview/usdzkml-utility the claimed token utility (discounts, buyback & burn), links to burn tracking
Tier‑1 https://zkml-1.gitbook.io/zkml/overview/tokenomics total supply 100M; buy/sell taxes; link to Etherscan
Tier‑1 https://etherscan.io/token/0xe92344b4edf545f3209094b192e46600a19e7c2d onchain token data (Max Total Supply, code, owner admin functions)
Tier‑2 https://www.coingecko.com/en/coins/zkml reference profile of the token (not proof of technology)

No comments to display

Back to top