BitShares Forum
Main => General Discussion => Topic started by: bitmarley on April 29, 2015, 09:38:51 am
-
Currently to receive BTS we need to hand out a registered nickname. This is not very good for privacy.
The ideal method from the users perspective would be Payees can generate Master Receive Addresses. These are handed out to Payers who associate them with their contact list and can re-use them many times to generate a new unique receive address.
Is there any intention to implement receive addresses in BitShares or something else to improve privacy?
-
Is there any intention to implement receive addresses in BitShares or something else to improve privacy?
How about
wallet_address_create <accountname>
What you are describing is possible in BitShares from the beginning ..
you account actually has a masterkey and you can derive 'private' child keys for each of your accounts (using a determinsitic scheme like BIP32 .. or was it BIP38?! .. ) .. you can derive as many child keys as you want ..
This is also the technique that is used by TITAN/stealth addresses
-
Just send from an unregistered account?
-
Is there any intention to implement receive addresses in BitShares or something else to improve privacy?
How about
wallet_address_create <accountname>
What you are describing is possible in BitShares from the beginning ..
you account actually has a masterkey and you can derive 'private' child keys for each of your accounts (using a determinsitic scheme like BIP32 .. or was it BIP38?! .. ) .. you can derive as many child keys as you want ..
This is also the technique that is used by TITAN/stealth addresses
Gee thanks. I am trying this now. I have to register the new account name too right? Will it be obvious in the blockchain that all my accounts are linked?
-
Gee thanks. I am trying this now. I have to register the new account name too right? Will it be obvious in the blockchain that all my accounts are linked?
no need to register an account name for this UNLESS you want to receive funds from someone else using the account name ...
registering an account name really is nothing more than putting your phone number in the public phonebook
-
Will it be obvious in the blockchain that all my accounts are linked?
If you want them to be not linked you should register all of them via the faucet or let other people pay for the registeration fee ..
else the "register account" transaction may pay the transaction fee from the same "balance" on the blockchain .. that will allows to link them
-
OK thanks.
So when many account names are registered it is not possible to link registered names to the same user/client unless there is a transaction between them. Particularly the registration fee is a dead giveaway so pre-fund the new account via another channel before registering the account name and then try not to transfer between your accounts.
Is the above correct? If so, another issue to consider is because each account is separate the BTS in one account does not act as collateral for the others. So if you want to short assets you will need to merge your accounts and thus lose the privacy you create between them.
-
OK thanks.
So when many account names are registered it is not possible to link registered names to the same user/client unless there is a transaction between them. Particularly the registration fee is a dead giveaway so pre-fund the new account via another channel before registering the account name and then try not to transfer between your accounts.
Is the above correct? If so, another issue to consider is because each account is separate the BTS in one account does not act as collateral for the others. So if you want to short assets you will need to merge your accounts and thus lose the privacy you create between them.
confirmed
-
Just thought I'd update since I've also learned that voting means you lose all your privacy because the signature of your voting will give away the connection between even your unregistered accounts.
Perhaps voting slates could help keep privacy. Or perhaps there is a way in the future to vote without compromising privacy.
-
Privacy is largely an illusion, even with Bitcoin and stealth addresses.
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
-
Privacy is largely an illusion, even with Bitcoin and stealth addresses.
I totally agree here .. with TITAN people get a wrong sense of privacy .. and I am sure BM realized that too already!
And indeed .. voting links all funds from your accounts .. but you could keep unregistered accounts unlinked to the voting process by voting manually
http://wiki.bitshares.org/index.php/DPOS/ApprovalVoting
-
I totally agree here .. with TITAN people get a wrong sense of privacy .. and I am sure BM realized that too already!
Please elaborate?
And indeed .. voting links all funds from your accounts .. but you could keep unregistered accounts unlinked to the voting process by voting manually
http://wiki.bitshares.org/index.php/DPOS/ApprovalVoting
Please elaborate? I thought voting only occured when moving BTS. How does moving BTS on account1 compromise privacy on account8?
-
Privacy is largely an illusion, even with Bitcoin and stealth addresses.
Please elaborate.
-
I totally agree here .. with TITAN people get a wrong sense of privacy .. and I am sure BM realized that too already!
Please elaborate?
Sure ... TITAN deposits in your account are collected to one balance. If you send from your TITAN account you might need to links several TITAN deposits. Everyone on capable of reading the blockchain will see that those deposits are owned by the same individual .. Same thing as in bitcoin .. you just don't have any information about the identity .. but can figure out his funds over time ..
That's why it is a false sense of privacy ..
And indeed .. voting links all funds from your accounts .. but you could keep unregistered accounts unlinked to the voting process by voting manually
http://wiki.bitshares.org/index.php/DPOS/ApprovalVoting
Please elaborate? I thought voting only occured when moving BTS. How does moving BTS on account1 compromise privacy on account8?
[/quote]
That is right .. but the GUI has a "vote now" bottom and I suppose it will vote with all stake in all accounts by sending them back to themselves in several transactions (one per account) .. those transactions will be executed in the same or subsequent block and may carry the same set of approved delegates ..
That's what "privacy" in http://wiki.bitshares.org/index.php/DPOS/ApprovalVoting#Your_choices_for_transactions
indicates!
-
I totally agree here .. with TITAN people get a wrong sense of privacy .. and I am sure BM realized that too already!
Please elaborate?
Sure ... TITAN deposits in your account are collected to one balance. If you send from your TITAN account you might need to links several TITAN deposits. Everyone on capable of reading the blockchain will see that those deposits are owned by the same individual .. Same thing as in bitcoin .. you just don't have any information about the identity .. but can figure out his funds over time ..
That's why it is a false sense of privacy ..
Well, with certain bitcoin clients, you can 'Send from' an address. I routinely use this to keep funds in the same wallet separate. And of course, I use different wallets for different things as well.
With BitShares you can't do this, but you can send your funds to yourself regularly. The way I understand it, assuming a TITAN account, over time it becomes more difficult to link things.. unless you send a huge transaction which will link all the mixed addresses.
I for one would dearly love that privacy was paid more attention around here. It seems to almost never be on the radar.. from the glaring lack of proxy support to Tor+the forum working only ~40% of the time, to the faucet STILL registering accounts as non titan (the issue you opened on github when I brought this to attention still sits there, unanswered)..
Privacy is important guys. I realize there are ALSO other priorities, BUT we should not forget that we have a right to privacy and that these technologies, if used wrong, are much worse than the traditional banking system in terms of privacy.
-
I agree that privacy *is* important. If you want privacy then treat each account as a unique "address" and then use it just like Bitcoin. Our wallet will no longer attempt to group "addresses" into one logical account for users because that kind of grouping compromises privacy in an uncontrollable manner.
I have been working on some killer privacy solutions, but they will not be available for a long time.
Using many addresses as the foundation for transfers/accounts is a major source of performance loss on all crypto currency networks.