Are addresses linked to each other?

[tkbx]

The way I understand it, you can have a (theoretically) unlimited number of addresses in one wallet, that wallet shares one balance, and you can't tell if two addresses are in the same wallet. Is this correct? If you were to receive a bitcoin in one address, could you then untraceably send the coin with another address, or would the address that received it send it to the address you're sending it from?

[deepceleron]

The problem you would have would be that in most wallets, you do not have control over which funding source is used.

Example:

1. Receive 1 BTC at your donation address that everyone knows, and
2. Receive 1 BTC to another address you want to keep private.

then

1. Send 1 BTC to buy nuclear detonators.

You can't guess which of the payments will be used fund a new transaction. If you want to send 1.5 BTC, then obviously both will be combined to fund the new transaction. You have even less chance that payments from different sources won't be combined if your wallet contains many different payments from different addresses. Other past or future transactions may also connect the two addresses to one owner.

If you wish to maintain anonymity and plausible deniability, it is best to use two different wallets to avoid any association between addresses.

Only the address that receives the Bitcoins can send them, they can't magically move from one address to another.

[mwag]

You can know if two addresses are in the same wallet if you control the wallet. If you do not control the wallet, you can make educated guesses using inputs of transactions.

You can only send coins from an address that has either had coins sent to it or has mined coins. So, no to your second question. The is fundamental in the way the block chain works.

[tkbx]

You can know if two addresses are in the same wallet if you control the wallet. If you do not control the wallet, you can make educated guesses using inputs of transactions.

You can only send coins from an address that has either had coins sent to it or has mined coins. So, no to your second question. The is fundamental in the way the block chain works.

So you can't just generate a one-time address to send BTC from without transferring BTC to it first?

[mwag]

You can know if two addresses are in the same wallet if you control the wallet. If you do not control the wallet, you can make educated guesses using inputs of transactions.

You can only send coins from an address that has either had coins sent to it or has mined coins. So, no to your second question. The is fundamental in the way the block chain works.

So you can't just generate a one-time address to send BTC from without transferring BTC to it first?

Correct.

[tkbx]

You can know if two addresses are in the same wallet if you control the wallet. If you do not control the wallet, you can make educated guesses using inputs of transactions.

You can only send coins from an address that has either had coins sent to it or has mined coins. So, no to your second question. The is fundamental in the way the block chain works.

So you can't just generate a one-time address to send BTC from without transferring BTC to it first?

Correct.

So theoretically, you should be able to trace any transactions back until you find the block they were generated in, right?

[Severian]

So theoretically, you should be able to trace any transactions back until you find the block they were generated in, right?

That's what the blockchain is for.

[mwag]

You can know if two addresses are in the same wallet if you control the wallet. If you do not control the wallet, you can make educated guesses using inputs of transactions.

You can only send coins from an address that has either had coins sent to it or has mined coins. So, no to your second question. The is fundamental in the way the block chain works.

So you can't just generate a one-time address to send BTC from without transferring BTC to it first?

Correct.

So theoretically, you should be able to trace any transactions back until you find the block they were generated in, right?

Yes. This is how counterfeiting is prevented. This is the public block chain.

If you want anonymity you must prevent any link between your public address and your identity.

[tkbx]

You can know if two addresses are in the same wallet if you control the wallet. If you do not control the wallet, you can make educated guesses using inputs of transactions.

You can only send coins from an address that has either had coins sent to it or has mined coins. So, no to your second question. The is fundamental in the way the block chain works.

So you can't just generate a one-time address to send BTC from without transferring BTC to it first?

Correct.

So theoretically, you should be able to trace any transactions back until you find the block they were generated in, right?

Yes. This is how counterfeiting is prevented. This is the public block chain.

If you want anonymity you must prevent any link between your public address and your identity.

Other than general paranoia, I don't really need anonymity, but isn't your IP recorded with your address?

[John (John K.)]

You can know if two addresses are in the same wallet if you control the wallet. If you do not control the wallet, you can make educated guesses using inputs of transactions.

You can only send coins from an address that has either had coins sent to it or has mined coins. So, no to your second question. The is fundamental in the way the block chain works.

So you can't just generate a one-time address to send BTC from without transferring BTC to it first?

Correct.

So theoretically, you should be able to trace any transactions back until you find the block they were generated in, right?

Yes. This is how counterfeiting is prevented. This is the public block chain.

If you want anonymity you must prevent any link between your public address and your identity.

Other than general paranoia, I don't really need anonymity, but isn't your IP recorded with your address?

No. Only the IP of the node that originally broadcasted the transaction is shown in blockchain.info, and that does not necessarily mean that the node belongs to the actual user.