FAQ

No. A bridge moves value and leaves a copy of it on the other side. Zolar moves nothing. Your ZEC stays in the Ironwood pool, and what arrives on Solana is a statement about it that expires on its own. That is a different category, not a gentler version of the same thing.

The test every feature has to pass: does it move value, or extend what the original can reach? Anything that makes a second copy is not Zolar.

No token is minted, at any point. Four teams already ship wrapped ZEC, and privacy dies at every one of those bridges. That is the failure Zolar exists to avoid. An attestation cannot be transferred, cannot be traded, and is worth nothing to anybody except the account it names.

An account holding four things: the claim, the anchor it was checked against, when it expires, and whose it is. Any program can read it, and the proof it was checked against is published beside it, so anybody can redo the arithmetic. It says nothing about which notes you hold, what you hold above the amount claimed, or who you are on Zcash.

It covers one note rather than a balance, so ten notes of one ZEC prove one and not ten. And it shows the note was in the tree at that anchor, not that it is still unspent today. Answering the second would mean publishing the value Zcash reveals when a note is spent, which would link that spend to a Solana account months later.

That is why an anchor carries an age and an attestation expires. A proof from three days ago is a true statement about three days ago.

Nothing. It never left the shielded pool. The twenty-four words you saved on the first screen are an ordinary BIP 39 phrase. Restore them in Zashi or Zodl and the funds are there, with or without this site.

That is why saving the phrase is a gate rather than a setting. It is the one layer that survives every failure above it.

No. The wallet is created inside your browser and the seed is encrypted there. There is no account system, no database, and nothing stored about you anywhere.

What is not private: rpc.zolar.cash, the relay that lets a browser reach a Zcash light node, sees your IP and which blocks you asked for. It never sees a key, a seed, or a witness.

The recovery phrase still opens the wallet. Your Solana signature only unlocks the local vault and never becomes the seed, so losing the account costs you convenience rather than funds. If the signature ever changes, the vault fails loudly instead of quietly handing you an empty new account.

Creating a fresh wallet is the right default for somebody new and the wrong one for you. The backup screen offers your exported vault file under the main path. Import that, or type the twenty-four words.

Zolar cannot recover an account on your behalf, because it never had one to recover.

In June 2026 a soundness bug surfaced in the Orchard circuit, four years undetected. Ironwood replaced that pool in July with one that is formally verified and keeps its own accounting. Building for both would mean three circuits instead of one, and two of them for a pool being retired.

The cost is real and falls on holders: notes you have not migrated out of Orchard are not served here.

Only as a doorway. Zolar reads a transparent balance and gives you one signed step to shield it into Ironwood, because money you hold is a fact you are entitled to see. Zolar will never prove anything about that balance while it sits there: funds at a transparent address are public, traceable, and outside the circuit.

The cost, accepted knowingly: many exchanges can only withdraw to a transparent address, so the route in from one runs through a shield rather than straight into the pool.

Because Zcash is not a smart contract platform and is not trying to be, so its TVL is zero by design. Solana already has the programs, the liquidity, and the users. Treating Zcash as a service that Solana calls, rather than an asset Solana imports, is the whole thesis.

The docs answer that component by component, and they are the only place that does. What is written, what is measured, and what has no code behind it is recorded there rather than repeated here, because a fact with two homes is a fact that will disagree with itself.

The roadmap tags every item that has no code behind it. Nothing there is described as finished that is not.

A quorum of attesters. Solana cannot follow Zcash consensus and cannot tell a real Ironwood anchor from an invented one, so it checks the quorum's signatures rather than the mathematics. This is not trustless, and calling it that would be false.

What bounds the quorum is publication. The proof sits beside the attestation and verifies in 6.4 ms anywhere, so a signature the proof does not support is caught by the first person who checks, and attributable to whoever signed it. How large the set should be and who is in it is an open question, and the docs keep it as one.