Another interesting article about Silent Payments was released on Hiro blog.
They explained basic of how Silent Payments work, and they mentioned how there is a lot more work to done on improving standard.
Electrum server protocol doesn't support silent payments so devs need to add t support to Electrum or create another standard.
https://www.hiro.so/blog/what-are-bitcoin-silent-payments
Topic: Wallets supporting Silent Payments (Read 1036 times)
Not bad since there is no risk with signet.
The signet faucet in perhaps the best thing about the project so far. We already have a few wallets we can use to play around with silent payments, but this is the first signet faucet I have seen. A quick search found another one. It's useful for those who want to test silent payments without using real bitcoin. According to https://silentpayments.xyz/, Dana Wallet supports both sending and receiving already, which is a plus. You can add Dana wallet to your list in OP if you want. This is a brand-new wallet and it's the first time I hear about it. It's currently in alpha pre-release stage. They call it a "silent payment-native bitcoin wallet." The developers warn against using it on mainnet for the time being because it's still being developed. They suggest using signet.
Thanks for suggesting, this is the first time I heard about Dana wallet.I will consider adding it in near future, but this is just pre-release of early Alpha version.
It is probably going to be many bugs, so I would still not suggest anyone using this new wallet, but it's nice to see another Silent Payment wallet.
The team has also created a signet faucet where you can get free signet coins
Not bad since there is no risk with signet.I will try how it works.
@dkbit98
You can add Dana wallet to your list in OP if you want. This is a brand-new wallet and it's the first time I hear about it. It's currently in alpha pre-release stage. They call it a "silent payment-native bitcoin wallet." The developers warn against using it on mainnet for the time being because it's still being developed. They suggest using signet.
The team has also created a signet faucet where you can get free signet coins:
https://silentpayments.dev/
More information and some screenshots of the wallet below:
https://www.nobsbitcoin.com/dana-wallet-v0-1-0-alpha/
https://github.com/cygnet3/danawallet/releases/tag/v0.1.0-alpha
You can add Dana wallet to your list in OP if you want. This is a brand-new wallet and it's the first time I hear about it. It's currently in alpha pre-release stage. They call it a "silent payment-native bitcoin wallet." The developers warn against using it on mainnet for the time being because it's still being developed. They suggest using signet.
The team has also created a signet faucet where you can get free signet coins:
https://silentpayments.dev/
More information and some screenshots of the wallet below:
https://www.nobsbitcoin.com/dana-wallet-v0-1-0-alpha/
https://github.com/cygnet3/danawallet/releases/tag/v0.1.0-alpha
it will be more beneficial to businesses men who accepts bitcoin. This technology will help them avoid the public tracking back to their address when they reuse it, vice versa.
Also individuals who give out their bitcoin addresses on social media for donations will like the silent payment because it will prevent people linking their bitcoin address to their real life identity.
Think about it for a moment. People might not be able to track how much bitcoin a businessman has received, but they will still know that they are accepting BTC. If you are on social media and accepting donations, you are probably registered with your real name. I would never donate to an anonymous individual over social media if I don't know who it is and there is no way to prove that the money would be put to good use. I am sure many think like me. And again, you can connect bitcoin to a real person who accepts it with their posting of their silent payment address. What you don't know are the amounts they have received. Also individuals who give out their bitcoin addresses on social media for donations will like the silent payment because it will prevent people linking their bitcoin address to their real life identity.
I am sure that campaign managers would quickly get on board. They were supportive of segwit as well when it came out and started becoming popular.
I wouldn't be so sure. There was a big incentive to switch to Segwit, because it is much cheaper for large sized transactions, especially when made on a regular basis. However, this one is a different case. More complex and will be treated as unnecessary addition for a lot of wallet software (compared to Segwit). I can agree, though, that it would help in signature campaigns, even if it's not a holy grail if used in general. Silent payment is not very necessary here in the forum, it will be more beneficial to businesses men who accepts bitcoin. This technology will help them avoid the public tracking back to their address when they reuse it, vice versa.
Also individuals who give out their bitcoin addresses on social media for donations will like the silent payment because it will prevent people linking their bitcoin address to their real life identity.
Did they receive bounty opened for implementation of sending to silent payment address? BitBox is among those wallets which may apply for 0.01 BTC (not a big sum but still money).. Worthy to note that still only two other hardware wallets (namely Passport and SeedSighner) are among hardware wallets which may apply for such bounty. The door has been shut on the rest of HW I wonder why?
I have no idea about that, but someone should create a bounty for receiving Silent Payments in hardware wallets, that seems to be more complicated thing to do.Adding Silent payments to our profiles would require an adoption from campagin managers as well, but it would change things more radically than segwit adoption.
I would support this.We just need more wallets getting full support and we need someone from nanagers to break the ice.
If you'd use the same Silent address for different things, you wouldn't know who paid you. And if you combine inputs, the sender still finds out which other addresses belong to you.
Event with Silent Payments you still need to have good management for your addresses, so you don't have to join all your addresses into one.I think we still need to have additional tool to get more privacy means second layer solution, mixing, coinjoin or joinstr.
I am sure that campaign managers would quickly get on board. They were supportive of segwit as well when it came out and started becoming popular.
I wouldn't be so sure. There was a big incentive to switch to Segwit, because it is much cheaper for large sized transactions, especially when made on a regular basis. However, this one is a different case. More complex and will be treated as unnecessary addition for a lot of wallet software (compared to Segwit). I can agree, though, that it would help in signature campaigns, even if it's not a holy grail if used in general. 
you will have to know all the places where you posted your unique silent payment address
That in itself is a privacy problem: you'll link your presence on different sites together. Easy fix is of course to use different Silent addresses. To be, labeling isn't a problem. I like it. Adding Silent payments to our profiles would require an adoption from campagin managers as well, but it would change things more radically than segwit adoption.
I am sure that campaign managers would quickly get on board. They were supportive of segwit as well when it came out and started becoming popular. Besides, they don't lose anything if they support silent payments. But we will surely have to wait some time before we get to the point where the most commonly used wallets support this BIP. When that time comes, silent payments should become a normal thing. LoyceV does have a point, though, in that you will have to know all the places where you posted your unique silent payment address, and if you are using the same one everywhere, you won't be able to keep track of who paid you and for what. Unless, you know what amounts come from where.
Creating a new address, labeling it, taking care of inputs etc is complicated if you are worried about privacy.
Basically every week I need to give an address to some campaign or giveaway contest etc...
If you'd use the same Silent address for different things, you wouldn't know who paid you. And if you combine inputs, the sender still finds out which other addresses belong to you. Basically every week I need to give an address to some campaign or giveaway contest etc...
Maybe it can improve privacy for signature campaigns, depending on how the campaign manager publishes results. Or for sure it would be a privacy improvement if it replaces the address posted in Bitcointalk profiles.
I would really love such feature.
Creating a new address, labeling it, taking care of inputs etc is complicated if you are worried about privacy.
Basically every week I need to give an address to some campaign or giveaway contest etc...
Adding Silent payments to our profiles would require an adoption from campagin managers as well, but it would change things more radically than segwit adoption.
It's now official, BitBox02 just added support for Silent Payments,
Did they receive bounty opened for implementation of sending to silent payment address? BitBox is among those wallets which may apply for 0.01 BTC (not a big sum but still money).. Worthy to note that still only two other hardware wallets (namely Passport and SeedSighner) are among hardware wallets which may apply for such bounty. The door has been shut on the rest of HW I wonder why?
It's now official, BitBox02 just added support for Silent Payments, and this is now the first Hardware Wallet that can send Silent Payments.
This is a step in a right direction but note that receiving Silent Payments is not available yet with BitBox wallet.
I am hoping other hardware wallets will soon follow this example.
BitBox made a blog post explaining how Silent Payments work:
https://bitbox.swiss/blog/understanding-silent-payments-part-one/
List is updated:
This is a step in a right direction but note that receiving Silent Payments is not available yet with BitBox wallet.
I am hoping other hardware wallets will soon follow this example.
BitBox made a blog post explaining how Silent Payments work:
https://bitbox.swiss/blog/understanding-silent-payments-part-one/
List is updated:
- Cake Wallet beta
- Silentium wallet web experimental
- SeedSigner test
- Blue Wallet sending only
- BitBox02 Hardware Wallet sending only
Good move from BitBox.
They showed several times they really care about bitcoin privacy, they even donated to Samourai defense fund few weeks ago:
Unfortunately, they also showed a different side of themselves when Shift Crypto, their parent company, was one of the creators of AOPP, essentially a privacy-invasive KYC system for third-party and private addresses. Several other companies adopted AOPP soon after, but many gave up on the implementation after their users provided negative feedback about it. I think BitBox and Shift Crypto never walked away from this idea, mainly because Swiss regulatory law requires that their citizens perform verification of third-party bitcoin addresses. They showed several times they really care about bitcoin privacy, they even donated to Samourai defense fund few weeks ago:
Maybe it can improve privacy for signature campaigns, depending on how the campaign manager publishes results. Or for sure it would be a privacy improvement if it replaces the address posted in Bitcointalk profiles.
Donation addresses too, can benefit from this. Nobody would know who donated to people or organizations who posted the donation address.
Although, this might only make sense if the donations being sent via silent payments are large denominations of Bitcoins, like 1mBTC. It doesn't really work if the amounts are smaller than that, because a significant percentage is just going to be wasted on fees.
I don't know if bitcoin mixing can be imrpoved with Silent Payments but I would like to see someone trying to do this.
I don't think so. Silent payments only improve privacy when the address was publicly published. Mixers show the address in private to their user. Even if they'd use a Silent address, the on-chain result is exactly the same.Maybe it can improve privacy for signature campaigns, depending on how the campaign manager publishes results. Or for sure it would be a privacy improvement if it replaces the address posted in Bitcointalk profiles.
Silent payments would not be very silent if they could be easily identified in the blockchain (hence chain analysis also identifies them) - so therefore it's a good thing that there's crap like Ordinals and Runes for it to blend in with, "obfuscation" if you may call it that.
I have a feeling more wallets and privacy services will use Silent Payments in future and that should be good for everyone who likes to have more privacy.I don't know if bitcoin mixing can be imrpoved with Silent Payments but I would like to see someone trying to do this.
It looks like BitBox will soon become the first hardware wallet manufacturer to support silent payments. It will probably be released soon with an upcoming firmware/software update. There is already a video of a BitBox02 making a transaction to a silent payment address.
Good move from BitBox.They showed several times they really care about bitcoin privacy, they even donated to Samourai defense fund few weeks ago:
https://x.com/BitBoxSwiss/status/1810693680203755523
It looks like BitBox will soon become the first hardware wallet manufacturer to support silent payments. It will probably be released soon with an upcoming firmware/software update. There is already a video of a BitBox02 making a transaction to a silent payment address.
[...]
The problem with this solution is that you can't have an accurate transaction history if you need to use the wallet from more than one device regularly. Personally, I don't find this that much of an issue.It's difficult to keep track of your transactions in more than one device anyways, unless I'm the only one using labels.
Silent payments would not be very silent if they could be easily identified in the blockchain (hence chain analysis also identifies them) - so therefore it's a good thing that there's crap like Ordinals and Runes for it to blend in with, "obfuscation" if you may call it that.
It's pretty easy to spot an Ordinal. I don't see how this obfuscates the silent payments.On the other hand when the blocks are full of Taproot outputs, it becomes more computationally expensive to search for them.
According to these stats, in the last 90 days, only 1.66% of the output volume was of type taproot. People still use P2PKH very regularly (35.92%!!!), even under high fees. Jump to: