pull down to refresh

21 sats \ 1 reply \ @kilianbuhn OP 8 Feb \ parent \ on: What's the role of transaction size in onchain privacy? bitcoin_beginners
Shouldn't this mean having never used an exchange with a wallet makes onchain Bitcoin way more private than its reputation?
You should always try to avoid KYC of any form for any transaction. However, Bitcoin's reputation for poor on chain privacy is generally accurate. Unless you take specific measures to control how your UTXOs are spent, you will casually link all of your transactions together over time.
But why tho? Never used an exchange with this wallet. Always VPN. Widely used wallet so not that uncommon type/version/locktime/feerate. Most transactions have odd sizes. Now what? Where is the attack surface on that wallet?
write
preview
100 sats \ 0 replies \ @kruw 8 Feb
But why tho? Never used an exchange with this wallet. Always VPN. Widely used wallet so not that uncommon type/version/locktime/feerate. Most transactions have odd sizes. Now what? Where is the attack surface on that wallet?
Assuming you are also using your full node or client side block filters to protect your privacy during synchronization, then the remaining attack surface would be the common input ownership heuristic.
Widely used wallet so not that uncommon type/version/locktime/feerate. Most transactions have odd sizes.
Just because you are using random fingerprints doesn't guarantee you are fully protected. If the recipient fingerprints themselves, your change output is identified through process of elimination.
reply