AI Agent Identity Needs Blockchain, Legal Experts Say
Legal experts argue blockchain technology is essential to establish identity for AI agents making payments, as current laws assume human approval for every transaction.
AI agents already independently pay for data, computing power, and web searches, yet current legal frameworks still require human approval for every financial transfer. This disconnect forms the core of the emerging debate around AI agent identity, with members of BeInCrypto's Legal & Regulatory Council suggesting blockchain technology offers a solution.
The market for AI agent payments remains nascent but growing. A recent BeInCrypto Intelligence report tracked 6.4 million x402 payments over 35 days, primarily involving small sums for data and API calls. Despite these modest transactions, financial institutions like JPMorgan have already taken precautions, blocking external AI agents from customer accounts due to concerns about potentially rogue agents.
Legal Gap
Existing US legislation provides little guidance for this new reality. The Electronic Fund Transfer Act, established in 1978, governs unauthorized transfers under the assumption that humans authorize each transaction. Meanwhile, the GENIUS Act regulates stablecoin issuers but offers no provisions for the agents spending those digital currencies.
This legal uncertainty creates significant liability questions. When an AI agent books an incorrect flight or makes an erroneous payment, determining responsibility becomes challenging. The issue extends beyond simple error to fundamental questions about AI agent identity and accountability in financial systems.
Blockchain Solution
Blockchain technology could provide the necessary framework for AI agent identity, according to legal experts. Vyara Savova, a senior policy expert at the European Crypto Initiative, envisions blockchain bundling payment rails, identification systems, and trust layers into a single solution.
So then we have the payment rails, the identification rails, basically the trust layer, all in one, which would to a very large extent solve this.
Lawyer Anja Blaj Zajc argues that zero-knowledge (ZK) proofs can resolve the apparent conflict between privacy and accountability. These cryptographic techniques can verify human involvement in AI agent transactions without exposing personal data.
You would have the ZK proof that proves that there's indeed a human behind that agent, that there's going to be somebody responsible for that agent.
Regulatory Landscape
Transparency requirements are already emerging in some jurisdictions. Lord Chris Holmes, a UK House of Lords member who sponsored AI regulation legislation, emphasizes the need for clear disclosure about AI usage in transactions. The EU has implemented similar requirements through Article 50 of the EU AI Act, which mandates that chatbot providers inform users when they're interacting with an AI system.
However, current regulations focus on disclosure rather than verification of human identity behind AI payments. Until lawmakers address this gap, financial institutions may continue restricting AI agent access. The legal community increasingly views ZK-based AI agent identity as a promising interim solution—proving human responsibility while preserving privacy.
Related
