Topic: Are blockchain explorer threat to the privacy ? (Read 757 times)

I don't say that they will arrest you without evidence, I have never said or mentioned that. I say that they will try more to track you when they see that you are trying to protect your privacy, especially when it comes to public tor usage. I don't say people who use Tor are criminals, for sure, they aren't but there is a group of people who use that for criminal activities and that's more than enough excuse for governments to spy on you even if you don't do anything bad. Tor is also different from VPN. VPN is used by many people and they can't simply spy on so many people but Tor is used by narrow audience.
Just imagine, they see that John uses Tor, they automatically suspect John is hiding something or doing something wrong. This prioritizes John and they probably track your more carefully. But if you hide your Tor activity, like via a tor bridge and they don't know that you use Tor, they won't prioritize you and see you like a regular internet user and regular user is never their important target.

You can use Tor Bridge but it's not the best solution because Tor Bridges are meant for people who really need it, i.e. for people who want to access censored content from Iran and other countries. I don't promote VPNs but for basic privacy, some VPNs like Mullvad and IVPN are good solutions, they are probably less likely to be honeypot but you know, number one rule is to be critical and pessimist when it comes to tools you use for protecting your privacy, you should always assume worst case scenario.
By the way, showing your ISP that you use Tor is like yelling "I am protecting my privacy" in the street. Obfuscated servers are better choice.

I know that in the eyes of a surveillance state, I'm looking suspicious, but this happens to protect what I'm wishing to hide. But, nonetheless, just because some people think I'm doing something illegal via Tor, it doesn't mean they can arrest me without evidence.

You can't act beyond an extent. VPN providers are likely honeypots. If you connect to Tor via a VPN (which is not recommended), you might as well look suspicious, because:
- VPNs are not used by the "crowd" either.
- VPNs can hand over logs if the authorities request it, and see you're connecting to Tor.

You can't protect your privacy if you're "acting" you don't care. You obviously don't get to the streets and start yelling "I'm protecting my privacy" (as that would actually reduce it), but that doesn't mean you won't utilize privacy protecting tools like Tor, because the ISP will deem you suspicious. Your alternative is to let the ISP know what you're doing. Your choice.

Without going too much off topic, if you use Windows and/or Chrome you should assume your privacy is zero.

On older versions of Windows I understand it is still possible to lock down much of the privacy invasion, but on Windows 11 it is absolutely staggering just how much telemetry and monitoring is going on behind the scenes and how often it is connecting to Microsoft and whole host of third parties and reporting on what you are doing. Chrome is even worse, and I've said before many times on this forum that Chrome is literally spyware with a browser slapped on top. If you use Chrome, Google know everything that you do online.

Not only are you not protecting it, but you are making things actively worse by allowing Google to track and record all your activity.

Your explanation is plain and simple, good job!
By the way, it's funny, how people know only one side of privacy and think everything goes well behind the scenes too. There are many people who use window + chrome browser and Electrum connected to public servers. When you open your Google Chrome, visit mixer and send coins from your wallet to bitcoin mixer and then check the transaction on Blockchair.com, are you really protecting your privacy? Or maybe you are only paying extra fees to mixer owner? There is no privacy protection in this case because absolutely every necessary data is leaked to trace you, no mixer can't help if you don't hide your IP and don't run your own node or one connected to Tor. It looks like to buy a mask and put it in your bag and think that no one can see your face now.
We need a cyber security board, there are more than enough reasons for that!

I would not be in the least bit surprised if it emerged that many of the most widely used blockchain explorers are owned and operated by blockchain surveillance companies or indeed governments themselves. We already know that such entities run various third party servers which are used by light wallets, so I imagine the same is also true for blockchain explorers.

The irony that you made this statement just the day before FinCEN posted legislation to do just that.

Depends. If you are not using Tor, then you are probably leaking enough information via just your browser to de-anonymize yourself. Not just your IP address, but your browser fingerprint is almost certainly unique, and can be linked to everything else you have done in that browser, including login in to social media profiles and whatnot. I've explained this in more depth in this reply here: https://bitcointalksearch.org/topic/m.62893651

          -  They can only find your address if I only know and understand how to use the blockchain explorer; they won't be able to find or comprehend who you are in real life. But if I'm not mistaken, the hacker can access it through the IP address if I'm not mistaken in my understanding of this.

Now, perhaps what others are doing for everyone isn't truly a mattress; in this case, the usage of others in Bitcoin mixing enters the picture to deceive those who have nefarious intentions to steal Bitcoins from other addresses.

Racism in United States is very different in any other country. USA is an artificial country where 99.99% of the population is immigrants and most of them think only others are immigrants while they are "true" "red blooded American". Which is actually funny if you think about it.
This has always created "conflicts" among different groups and minorities like people of color have always been the target of all groups.
Statistically speaking when it comes to US law enforcement, they tend to be "extra brutal" towards the minorities...

Oh, it has nothing common with North Korea and here I don't emphasize hoodie but the way this man tries to cover his face and hide from others, hoodie looks to be a part of it. If you think that you won't attract cops attention by this look, I think you should just try They won't arrest you, that's for sure but you know, you attract their attention more because of your unusual behavior and outfit. And why is it so hard for you guys to understand my point? Or maybe you understand but I don't get why do you disagree with it, maybe my examples are bad. Okay, I would say, if you want to hide that you are a millionaire, just don't buy Ferrari and buy a Toyota, just don't buy a luxury apartment and buy an average house or apartment.

I think that my logic in this case is very near to reality. If you use TOR and your ISP sees that, then a legitimate question arises: This man either does something illegal or wants to protect its privacy. But why does he want to protect his privacy? Probably he does something bad.
What do you think, what would ISP and cops think when you use TOR? Oh, he is a good man, he just wants freedom and to protect his privacy, that's all. Do you really think that cops or ISP think like that? If you hide your TOR usage from your ISP and connect TOR that way, then you protect your privacy and at the same time, no one has doubt about you because you look like an average guy from the outside.

No, privacy matters for me but you have to think outside the box. When you take care of your privacy online, you have to realize that you are different from the rest of individuals. When you realize that, you will also realize that people don't care about their privacy online and the fact that people share sensitive information in Facebook, Twitter, Instagram and so on, proves again that people don't care about their privacy. When you discover that majority of people don't care about privacy online but you care, you'll also discover that you probably look a little different from crowd for those, who watch everyone. In order to protect your privacy, you have to act like you don't care, like, using Tor bridges to hide your tor activity or VPN + Tor. If you want another level of privacy, then this advice doesn't apply to you.

I think both, white and black people are equally, brutally harassed and murdered by the US police. Do you see more black people arrested? Probably more black people commit crimes, I don't know, I don't think it's totally because of racism. From my personal experience, I have noticed that more black people sell drugs and steal bicycles or kidnap, shoplift. I am not a racist, I swear to god but I can also swear that probably 90% of black men sell drugs near my bahnhof, usually immigrants I bet. Local people (race doesn't matter), grown in local neighborhood, tend to be more polite and well mannered.

Tell that to the black people in United States (supposedly "not a dictatorship") that are regularly harassed and murdered for no reason by the brutal US police just because of their "looks"

I should add that I don't deny the need for protecting your privacy specially on the internet where the biggest privacy invading organization is the United States Military (ie. NSA) which is actively invading your every move. But you can't deny that in the eyes of a privacy invading regime, anybody who makes their invasion harder is doing something wrong! They may even go as far as calling it "breaking the law"...

yeah

1) pay your tax no government issue
2) live in a country that lets you own btc.
3) if you have lots of value on the address never open it in public.

why is that for number 3 simple I now know you have 30 btc or 10 btc or 100 btc.  this makes you a perfect person to do  wrench attack on.

Um. Unless you live in North Korea or some other dictatorship, both of those people won't be stopped by a cop just because of their looks. Everyone is guilty until proven otherwise, you can't claim the "hoodie" guy is more guilty because of their look.

You cannot pretend like privacy doesn't matter to you, unless it really doesn't matter. You cannot protect your privacy by evading privacy protecting tools. That's just sad if it works that way in your country. If the government merely catches me using Tor, it is beyond insane to me to blame me guilty. It is however not insane at all if it blames me for browsing illegal sites (which is possible to notice if you don't route your traffic through Tor).

That's the problem, why do you want privacy? Maybe because you are hiding something? Yes, yes, for sure.

Look at this image of Man in hoodies hiding and look at this [url=https://d2gg9evh47fn9z.cloudfront.net/800px_COLOURBOX24232202.jpg]man walking in the street.

Be frank! What do you think, who will attract cops' attention, the first man or the second man? Cops will think that the first man is either criminal or hiding something and they will go after him, no one thinks that the first man protects about his privacy. But the second man, he looks like a typical guy walking in the street, he won't attract their attention and will walk away without problems. That's why is that guy using TOR is a valid question and if you want to protect your privacy, you have to pretend like you don't try to protect your privacy. Easy solution, hide your TOR activity.

That's too complicated of a task. It's lke going after torrent users. Those who get "caught" downloading torrents are those who don't download using VPN software, making them easy to identify. Many VPNs aren't secure and store logs, but they are enough to drive off prying eyes looking for easy victims. Unless they are really interested in you and target you for major crimes, they won't waste their resources just to get information.   

It's not exclusively about government agencies requesting that information from block explorers. It's generally the fact that they might possess it. I suspect a lot of people use block explorers to double-check their transactions. I'm sure there are companies, surveillance first and foremost, that would pay for that kind of information.

How can they have a crackdown on P2P exchanges? Which government has even attempted to do that?

I guess we are thinking too far that the governments (where the bitcoin is illegal) will track those users who are searching the block explores and then relate those BTC belonging to them and ask them to give justifications. Doesn't look like it is enough evidence with the government agencies to prove that we are the owners of those addresses.

They will rather have a crackdown on the P2P exchangers operating in the country and through them try to figure out who exchange bitcoin to fiat and vice versa and ask them to come in the court of law for explanation of these transactions.

Don't forget the name of your thread. You asked if blockchain explorers are a privacy threat but what you are talking about here is a matter of the security of your coins. Their job is to gather information and sell and share this information with anyone willing to pay for it. That someone could be a government agency who might be looking for data on their citizens. After that, you could be asked why you haven't declared you own those coins or paid your taxes, etc., etc. If Bitcoin is illegal in your country, there is more trouble for you.   

Well they'll never be able to do that with a VPN, since it's literally just someone's HTTP proxy in another country. And this is where I think it really comes handy. Because block explorers are all websites, you can mask your fingerprints to them just by connecting your VPN or even switching to a homemade HTTP proxy.

Correct. It's called "cormorant".

It is.

Nothing.

Sparrow uses a single Bitcoin wallet called "cormorant" for all wallets you create using Sparrow. Each time you create a new wallet in Sparrow, it will add new descriptors to the same cormorant wallet, and each Sparrow wallet will only pull the relevant data it needs. You can import as many different descriptors in to this Bitcoin cormorant wallet as you like - each Sparrow wallet will still only pull the data for the descriptors set up in that specific Sparrow wallet, which as we've established, does not accept individual public keys.

Well, good to know that Sparrow is pretty much centered on HD wallets and apparently doesn't want to support all descriptor features of Bitcoin Core. A bit sad, but I can accept the rationale. Alternatives exist (Electrum and Bitcoin Core).

I might still not give up and try to push Sparrow to its limits. My idea is based on the observation when you connect Sparrow to Bitcoin Core. When you create a wallet in Sparrow, there's actually a bitcoind wallet created (behind the scenes). I haven't checked yet, but this might be a descriptor wallet. Now what happens in Sparrow when you extend this bitcoind descriptor wallet within Bitcoin Core with some other fancy, maybe single key, descriptors? Will Sparrow break or swallow the bait?

Yes and no.

It does support descriptors, but if you try to import a descriptor which only includes a single public key, such as:

You get the following the error:
Yeah, Craig has said as much on GitHub. It's a fairly niche use case, and I can understand the reasons behind not supporting it, so I'm not too bothered.