Topic: Single Address reuse and transparency (Read 461 times)

Ok, thanks. I think I will start with something like Electrum then. Checking BTC send to me will be done in code and that info is public, and sending BTC back can be done manually initially to make sure everything is correct. I'm thinking just sending back to the same where it came from, although I know it is a bit dangerous if it came from a shared address. Need to make sure people send from an address they control and isn't shared.

I suggest that you use a local wallet instead of a web wallet. If you are fine with downloading and verifying the entire blockchain, I recommend that you use Bitcoin Core. Although currently it is somewhat difficult to get the master public key. If you don't want to run a full node, you can use a lightweight wallet like Electrum.

Any recommendations on which deterministic wallet to use? Blockchain.info doesn't support it it seems.

Are these addresses for people to only send money to you? If so, you can use a HD wallet. HD wallets are deterministic wallets and use a master keys from which all addresses you use from that wallet are derived from. If you use non-hardened addresses, you can publish the master public key so that everyone can derive the addresses you are giving out and thus you get transparency. At the same time, people sending you money will get a new address, and finding out that the address belongs to you is more difficult than having a known address.

Hey!

I know there are other threads on this already, but I wanted to ask anyway to get your input on this.

So, I'm working on something where I want to be as transparent as possible regarding the project itself, but also provide anonymity for the users, and thought that having one address to deposit to would be a good idea because of how easy it is for everyone to see how things are by it. However, reading here:

https://en.bitcoin.it/wiki/Address_reuse and here https://www.reddit.com/r/Bitcoin/comments/3euuka/still_confusedwhy_is_it_not_secure_to_reuse/

I noticed that it it might not be the best way of doing it. Now, it is easer code wise, as I don't need code to generate new address and all that comes with that, but a new address per deposit would seem much "safer" regarding the users anonymity. However, with a new deposit address per user, would make it harder to be as transparent. I suppose there would be no escape from it either way. I mean, either use one address or expose the other "single use addresses", for how else would people be able to see how the project is doing without having to trust whatever I say, right?

What would you prefer?

The section about "Accidental loss" is also a bit scary. https://en.bitcoin.it/wiki/Address#Misconceptions is also a bit enlightening. I assume using the same address for everyone to deposit to would be safe, even if it's more of a "accidental feature". I mean, people do it all the time, and that works fine.

I just want to make sure everything is properly done here.

Thanks for your input!