Author Topic: Does Bitshares TITAN system provide true anonymity?  (Read 899 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline Troglodactyl

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 960
    • View Profile
TITAN does not offer true anonymity .. at least not if you use your balance to vote .. that's why TITAN will not be available by default in BitShares2.0 it offered a false sense of privacy.

Instead, BitShares2.0 will have blinded transactions where you cannot read the actual AMOUNT of a transaction. Furthere there will be stealth transactions, but I don't yet know how those actually work out (in contrast to TITAN)

This is true, but to answer the direct question, TITAN does create new sub-addresses for each receive, and the funds are not automatically aggregated into the main account.  This is why after using the 0.9.x wallet for a long period of time, your funds will be divided among numerous subaccounts, and why after restoring a wallet from an old backup you must regenerate keys before all your funds will be visible.

Offline xeroc

  • Board Moderator
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 12920
  • ChainSquad GmbH
    • View Profile
    • ChainSquad GmbH
  • BitShares: xeroc
  • GitHub: xeroc
TITAN does not offer true anonymity .. at least not if you use your balance to vote .. that's why TITAN will not be available by default in BitShares2.0 it offered a false sense of privacy.

Instead, BitShares2.0 will have blinded transactions where you cannot read the actual AMOUNT of a transaction. Furthere there will be stealth transactions, but I don't yet know how those actually work out (in contrast to TITAN)

Offline hughmanwho

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 61
    • View Profile
I've spent a lot of time trying to understand the TITAN system from a technical point of view and something isn't clicking for me.

As I understand it, it boils down to the sender creates a new wallet address that can be unlinked from his regular wallet address, he then sends money from regular wallet to new wallet address, which is then sent to the other users new wallet address that receives the funds, which can then be added to the receivers' regular wallet address, correct?

Does that whole chain of sending money to that unlinked account still exist but only just add a few links in the mean time that make it a little harder to trace.  But ultimately you can just follow 3 transactions, instead of 1 transaction, right?

Or is the idea that the money never actually gets sent back to the reciever's account and instead he can spend it out of this other account sort of similar to UTXO?

Doesn't the money still have to flow out of the sender's 'main' account?  Or is the idea also that similar to UTXO it flows out of other unspent transactions and therefore the link to the 'main' account never happens?  The user's wallet would then just have to remember all these UTXOs.

Maybe the only thing that happens between sender and receiver is an agreement over what those other addresses are?

Anyway, something isn't clicking and I'm wondering if this provides true anonymity or just a little extra confusion for the attacker, can someone explain this?

Thank you!