Topic: Does public key reveal that transactions end up in the same wallet ? (Read 1483 times)

I'd go with zcash. It has good security people behind it and is open to scrutiny. I think it was first presented at Blackhat or Defcon. Otherwise use a mixer and assume it can be hacked.

or, if privacy is one of your overriding concerns, then you could just cut out the middle man and start dealing (pun intended) with Monero and on-chain mixing

I'm sure one of the TLA agencies (if not all) are busy working on a way to unravel Monero... that is the sort of thing that keeps THEM awake at night

I've wrote them before. What a lot of people don't know is key-generation algorithms don't need to be complex. It's the timing that matters. Assuming you have a firm like this sitting on your peers..

Some people even claim mixer IPs matter. They don't.

Doing things like not using prepared statements in PHP matters though. This is one of the major ways exchanges and mixers get hacked.. Devs around this community really suck..

It's really funny that few companies plus dozens of people investing millions on something like tracking transactions and you could go on and on about all the various ways to determine which address belongs to which wallet and so on, while there is a really simple and easy and cheap way to remove all the worrying and all the hassle from the equation is to use mixer, as you might already know mixers such as BitMixer.io are operating very effectively rendering all the efforts of said companies practically useless/void/futile.

@OP, you could use BitMixer if you want to stay hidden/private, then you could sleep knowing no one will be tracking you that is the reason for mixer(s) to exist.

They also have major contracts with govs all over the world.. Amazing the things nobody talks about here, right?

They notify law enforcement with IP data on key-exchanges and know the IP because they run peers. I'm guessing because there is no plaintext IP data on the blockchain..

Dan Kaminsky did some good coverage at BlackHat a couple times. I'll admit that even though I've been through all the source code and worked with scripts of core-reference I don't know 100% of everything. They certainly use peer-logging though..

These guys have, the exchanges pay them to work out if anyone is depositing dirty money. Also coinbase probably pays them to find out if any of its customers are breaking its rules by sending coins to gambling sites.


https://www.chainalysis.com/

In your particular scenario... I believe the answers are:

a) No. This is the point of minimising address re-use (using a different receiving address for each transaction), it "helps" (but does not guarantee) anonymity. What it will do, is allow people to link WalletA to AddressX, AddressY and AddressZ... but they can't look at those 3 transactions and say "X, Y and Z are all part of WalletB"... at this point, they could be WalletB, WalletC and WalletD for all we know.

What can happen from that point, is that then the person with WalletB sends out a single transaction that includes the outputs from those 3 transactions to X, Y and Z... and then people can track that and conclude that WalletA sent 3 transactions via Addresses X, Y and Z to WalletB, which then got sent on to other address(es)

b) As mentioned, until all those outputs that were put into X, Y and Z are spent as inputs to another transaction... it would be difficult to say with any certainty that those 3 address all belong to one "wallet"... Indeed, if the owner of WalletB then sent 3 transactions to 3 addresses, using a single output each time, it would be hard (although, probably not impossible using other methods) to link them all together.


I'm sure someone has thought up a use-case for tracking transactions through the blockchain... maybe hoping they get contracted by private eyes or lawyers (or the tax department ) trying to trace funds that people are moving around... and are probably making some good coin off of it

I think the terminology that you are using is not quite correct.

If you send three transactions from addresses that you control to three different addresses controlled by a single entity, then it may be possible to reasonably conclude that either the same entity sent all three transactions, that the same entity received all three transactions, or both, depending on the circumstances.

If the transactions that you send use more than one input, then it can usually be reasonably concluded which address is a change address, especially long after subsequent outputs have been spent. If two inputs are change addresses, then it is possible to reasonably conclude that a single entity controls a larger cluster of addresses than individual transactions might suggest.

If in one transaction, you send BTC to two different entities and no change address, it is sometimes reasonable to conclude this fact, and exclude both entities from being the owner of the sending addresses.

There are specialized tracking companies that do look at the blockchain that use even more advanced analytics (more specifically conclusions derived from these analytics techniques).

No, each address has a different public key. When you receive coins on an address the public key is not published, but only when you spend the first coins you received on a given address. Maybe you are refering to a master public key? It would be possible to conclude this if you expose the master public key to the public.


Not really sure what you are trying to ask here. Public keys are needed in order to verify a transaction, thus they are part of the blockchain. Not sure why anyone needs specialisation to save the blockchain.

Hello together,
I read quite a bit about bitcoin transactions, but never could find my question answered.

Say, I am sending out 3 transactions from my WalletA to 3 different addresses of WalletB.
a) Is it possible to conclude from the blockchain that the three transactions all land in the same wallet (the same public key) ?
b) Can specialized tracking companies by saving the public keys during the 3 transactions conclude that they all end up in the same wallet ?
Thank you.