Bitcoin Forum

Can't we make that and monitor incoming and outgoing transaction and reject payments coming from these blacklisted address?

ofcource i know people can change bitcoin address but we will still know that funds are coming from a blacklisted wallet untill they use a mixer.

Just think about a big database (like spammers database) filled with criminals/scammers bitcoin address?

People can use a site to report bitcoin address, scammed amount and other details and they will be able to search any bitcoin address in that database also.

This isn't going to happen.

ok King Trade Fortress.
HAH, you are stupid and your opinion doesn't matters.

 :D odd that I get to link to this twice within 24h after forgetting about it for months.

https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=151367.0

ETA:
V not sure how to respond to that.

Bumped your thread, didn't knew you already suggested a blacklist.

Ps: It can be done via blockchain.info too if they allow to give feedback on bitcoin address  (positive/negative) or by changing label of that address to something else like "blacklisted" after getting x amount of negative votes by registered members.

Who will decide which address is good and which one belongs to an a criminal? More importantly "quis custodiet ipsos custodes"?

I think this would be a big leap to a regulated bitcoin and a dangerous precedent.

People will decide. A Voting/feedback system maybe like mywot.com ratings , I'm not saying you need to ban or seize those bitcoin address or funds but put those address in blacklist so if people want they can see and search.

Voting can be rigged as well. Opinion of one community over another? Get a bunch of people to block some hoarder out of his money?

This idea is as dumb as it can possibly get.

Adresses should be nameless tools for us to use, not otherwise.

Edit: if you want a blacklist, not a ban of some sort - then you can simply make a website containing that blacklist.

Great idea.

Please add these:

1Cqrt87u9VC5Qr9RKT4qXwUXv1mVVyH25J
143z1UWrsRiiriSgPRVdrNrnKk8mxenhUb
1JY24MSC9jB6DgQWZ917kFapajwNMifpgu
1GqutsyqxAMbXRu5ZZAurf2ThMdcncwLMa

Done

Yay. I'm famous.  8)

this post proves my point somewhat

People will not decide after the first 15 minutes. Groups will decide and very soon some elected or self appointed representatives will decide. I'm afraid this would be the ultimate wunderwaffe for all people with god complex, trolls and racketeers plus the wet dream of all pro-regulation bitcoiners.

It will not block money dude, if site want they can deny payment from these blacklisted address and for more safety 1 vote per email/registered member can be done.

 :D Good demonstration. This is what we concerned about :).

I agree with those who feel this is a bad idea, rarely does voting lead to a logical outcome. Look at every "democratic" government in the world for examples.

Look it was just a rough idea, flaw's can be fixed and thing can be changed to make it good and i'm not saying to make it some sort of firewall to block address.


it can be done as a simple site too

for a example
look http://kidala.info

It's in russian but you can search scammers from their icq number,email id,payment account number .

A friend of mine is on Twitter blacklist. She can not post any links to her web site. Twitter claims it has malware but we have gone over it numerous times and found nothing, including several independent 3rd party scans.

We ask Twitter to specify what the malware is and get no response.
We ask Twitter to specify what page has malware and get no response.
We ask Twitter how to appeal their blacklist and get no response.

I do not like blacklists.

It is too easy for people to get onto them by mistake or false accusation and then not be able to get off of them and it then hurts their business. Meanwhile the real criminals find easy ways around them.

Scammer buys goods from reputable person.  Reputable person holds coins, then tries to spend them, but person C sees that coins were in a previous deal linked to scammer.  Innocent person B is screwed.

Not gonna happen.

I think this is backwards.

I would rather there be a white list of trusted addresses. Kind of how Satoshi Dice worked.

Every person who sends a payment could go to a site and post a signed message and give feedback/rating just like on Ebay.


Have a question about the address you're sending payment to? Look it up.

Selling on a forum and need to switch? Well now you can take that karma with you when you move.

So I offer a service to paint your adress white by spamming it with dust. Now what?

Implement a minimum transaction amount?

The Miner's get bonus in the block reward?




What you are doing is called moving the goal post

Thanks for suggesting new business ideas. Addresses laundering, blacklist removal services, trust-building services to get white-listed...

as long as blacklists are voluntary and not enforced at the protocol level and independent blacklist agencies to choose from  in case one does not suit your fancy ...the question is how would the blocking be implemented manually when a tx occurs? (auto address check against a chosen imported list w flagging) think(POS) point of sale ...also, how would individual nodes know to invalidate a tx unless it WAS enforced at the protocol level,  is the second ?

Then I'd be the first to blacklist your address because I'm an ass  :P

Oh man, I can't believe it.
I just went to the grocery store and couldn't buy my frozen burritos because they looked up the serial number and the 5 dollar bill I tried to use had been stolen from a 7-11 four years ago.

Neither does yours.

Yes, it will happen even if you like it or not, just watch.

It is a stupid idea by a stupid person.
who seems to forget that you can generate (2^160) bitcoin addresses... more than there are stars in the universe.

If anything a Whitelist  ... might be a better option... but what is to stop a scammer poisoning the whitelist. thereby making it useless.

I.E add several billion random "good clean" addresses to the list, then gradually use them for fraud.. Should just be enough for their lifetime....

Sure, let's approach a currency centered around decentralized anonymity by building a fucking DATABASE of people in it, THAT's a genius idea right there.

Not to be a prick but your idea is stupid both in principle and practice. Not only would it fly in the face of bitcoiners everywhere but it would essentially be impossible to implement because as has been pointed out, changing your wallet address is as simple as spending another 2 minutes on a web page and making a new email, which kids have been doing for Myspace since the mid 00's.

You would have to get 51% of miners to cooperate for a blacklist to work completely. I don't think that is likely to happen.


Perhaps you overlooked the fact that you would still have to send the bitcoins from the blacklisted address to the new address. A blacklist would prevent that.

A blacklist would only prevent that if the miners agreed to blacklist it at the blockchain level.
They won't because as soon as they did, an altcoin would take over and all the bitcoin they mined would be worthless.

Put centralization in the protocol? With a link to a single entity that can render all coins on an address useless? As you've said that is definitely never going to happen: First the devs / foundation will never get convinced this is a good idea, after that no miner / node I know of would ever update to such a version, if it does a fork / altcoin is probably going to take over.


It appears to me that at least half of the discussion is about a list not enforced by the network but by the community (on top of Bitcoin itself).

• If a private key gets stolen in almost all cases the owner will find out after the coins have left the wallet, if sent directly offchain (like to Mt. Gox for example) are you going to blacklist the addresses of Mt. Gox?
• If this list is central in any way every goverment / legal body can attack the list, or poison it with extreme ease. If it isn't it is going to be attacked by basically everyone else because it is the power to control the whole monetary system.
• And if you have a wallet that has stolen BTC from a blacklisted address 10 transactions back, are you allowed to trade? Hell I can even steal BTC, send them to random people to have them blacklisted ?
• if I don't know about the list / don't got the most recent version / etc. and I meet up with someone and buy some Bitcoin I can't use them at all?
• Good luck finding a way on determining who scammed who in basically the whole scammer accusation forum.
• What if you later find out about coins that were stolen x time ago but are now distributed across the whole network?

This would only work when you get all exchange parties on board (including parties like silkroad), somehow deal with mixers / exchanges or other parties that don't want to be obey to a blacklist. After that you have to make sure the database won't get hacked / lobbyd / controlled / spoofed by governments (or IPSs).

And if you find a way to deal with all these problems you just introduced centralization to Bitcoin?

So it's an extremely bad idea and it can never be implemented fairly any way.

EDIT: I would suggest instead of a blacklist that if you are going to trade with anonymous people on the internet and prevent scams from happening in the first place, you use a trusting system like bitcoin-otc. And if your bitcoins got stolen you should have been more careful (it may be hard, but that is the way it is right now).

I bet half of you idiots didn't even read thread properly and jumped on bandwagon.

So I want to say again idiots a blacklist here doesn't means funds will be useless, it just means they are bad address and bad funds.

But what does it matter if no one cares and continues?

This might be a good way for people who just got scammed to blow of some steam, but that's about as far as it will get. And if that was the plan discussed in this post I apologise for ranting about how a blacklist in the sense of the word is a bad idea.

A blacklist is just a whitelist with a different name.


If we were making a useless list, we could put you on it.

What's the point? The way Bitcoin works, there is always plausible deniability. Transaction inputs need to add up to outputs+fees - you cannot really "track" coins when there is more than one input.

I stopped reading after the "reject payments" thing...