Avoid reusing Litecoin Address

[wangxinxi]

Reusing Litecoin addresses reduces privacy. There is an effective way for avoiding that. Suppose your friend gives you an address L already used to send out transaction, and thus its pub key is known, denoted as P.

Then you can generate a new address for him to avoid using the old one following the method below. And only he knows the private key of the new address.

Suppose Litecoin's elliptic curve base point is G. Then you randomly choose a number a, and calculate aG + P, which is the pub key of the new address, and then take HASH160 of the pub key and you get the new address.

After sending Litecoins to the new address, you tell him a. And then he can calculate the new private key as x+a, where x is the private key of the original address L.

The reason is: since the original private key for P is x, i.e. P = xG, the private key for the new address is then x + a, because (x+a)G = P + aG.

Next, I am going to introduce how to use this trick to create a decentralised Litecoin Blockchain based CoinJoin service for Litecoin.

[kelsey]

look at your trust rating and you're a core litecoin dev   maybe thats why you're pushing CT in Litecoin?

[wangxinxi]

look at your trust rating and you're a core litecoin dev   maybe thats why you're pushing CT in Litecoin?

Nope. Did you read the ratings and my answers? It's not easy to run a business with 100% customer satisfaction.

[kelsey]

now i'm a big fan well of the clean litecoin.

but i've read much of your writings and i can see you are rather toxic to litecoin.

also having Founder & CEO of Coinut.com also a core dev is heading for similar disaster as bitcoin. you don't seem to be able to get you're head around crypto as an alternative to the banks controlled fiat, and like to add similar toxic products that we already have in the fiat world.

now adding CT to invite the criminal element into litecoin communty.

[wangxinxi]

now i'm a big fan well of the clean litecoin.

but i've read much of your writings and i can see you are rather toxic to litecoin.

also having Founder & CEO of Coinut.com also a core dev is heading for similar disaster as bitcoin. you don't seem to be able to get you're head around crypto as an alternative to the banks controlled fiat, and like to add similar toxic products that we already have in the fiat world.

now adding CT to invite the criminal element into litecoin communty.

No, I consider no interest of Coinut when I am working on Litecoin. You worried too much about it. I am not like Blo****em guys.

[kelsey]

No, I consider no interest of Coinut when I am working on Litecoin.

  yes

[wangxinxi]

No, I consider no interest of Coinut when I am working on Litecoin.

  yes

The main reason is that I believe in Litecoin so I invested quite a lot personally.

[kelsey]

No, I consider no interest of Coinut when I am working on Litecoin.

  yes

The main reason is that I believe in Litecoin so I invested quite a lot personally.

well your obsession with the CT push leaves alot of us longterm supporters and purest rather concerned.

[Spoetnik]

Agreed kelsey.
I also don't care about being obsessive about privacy.
If you knew about security you'd know it makes little difference.
You can make it *harder* but that is it.. security is an illusion.

And the ANON crap push with Litecoin will be far more detrimental than it will be positive.
You guys are pushing it because it pads those bags you mentioned.

All i see is a coin that has suffered with a decline in popularity over the years.
So the solution is to pander to trends ?
Trends driven by idiot profiteers hoping to short term flip coins for profit ?
News Flash: they will betray you ..again*

Pandering does not create or attract "Supporters" it lures in the dregs of society.

Pandering is shooting yourself in the foot.
Take Microsoft for example.. they have a long history of that crap and they are hated for it.
They died at Windows 7 ..i will never use any product or service from them ever again.
because they are all garbage.. same with google etc.

ANON crap is not *needed* it's wanted by bag holders to increase popularity.
And look who's talking LOL
Guys from exchanges and BAG HOLDERS
Is it the public every day users that requested this ANON shit ? of course not.. they don't care !
YOU DO !

You last desperate dregs here hoping to make a buck of something.
So The agenda ?
Buy a ton of LTC because it's cheap and not popular with lemmings who follow what ever is rising in price..
THEN..
Hype it up with ANON shit padding your bags.

Spit on the long term supporters faces more guys  

never ever pander.. it's suicide !

[shyliar]

I suppose those who are against privacy think Snowden should go to prison for exposing the US government for spying on its citizens. There are numerous reasons for wanting privacy besides criminal activity.

If crypto was ever adopted at the level many of you hope for private businesses would not enjoy competitors being able to gather information about their financial dealings is just one example.

Individuals in countries with corrupt governments might need privacy just like they need TOR now to be able to view internet content that might land them in prison if traced. These types of individuals might be considered criminals in their local jurisdictions; but, those of us living where we can think freely shouldn't impede their opportunity to pursue more than what is dictated.

A few minutes searching the internet can find numerous articles discussing how bitcoin is viewed as being easier to trace than cash by law enforcement.

[dinofelis]

I suppose those who are against privacy think Snowden should go to prison for exposing the US government for spying on its citizens. There are numerous reasons for wanting privacy besides criminal activity.

If crypto was ever adopted at the level many of you hope for private businesses would not enjoy competitors being able to gather information about their financial dealings is just one example.

Individuals in countries with corrupt governments might need privacy just like they need TOR now to be able to view internet content that might land them in prison if traced. These types of individuals might be considered criminals in their local jurisdictions; but, those of us living where we can think freely shouldn't impede their opportunity to pursue more than what is dictated.

A few minutes searching the internet can find numerous articles discussing how bitcoin is viewed as being easier to trace than cash by law enforcement.

Amen.

[dwgscale11]

We need the optional CT.  There's no reason not to be for this.  Those who are against it need to wake up.

[freshman777]

What's the ETA on CT in Litecoin?

[artows21]

This is maybe interesting, but it kills all the beauty of the vanity addresses. I'd really like to have my own address, it has a big charm I think !

[Spoetnik]

I suppose those who are against privacy think Snowden should go to prison for exposing the US government for spying on its citizens. There are numerous reasons for wanting privacy besides criminal activity.

If crypto was ever adopted at the level many of you hope for private businesses would not enjoy competitors being able to gather information about their financial dealings is just one example.

Individuals in countries with corrupt governments might need privacy just like they need TOR now to be able to view internet content that might land them in prison if traced. These types of individuals might be considered criminals in their local jurisdictions; but, those of us living where we can think freely shouldn't impede their opportunity to pursue more than what is dictated.

A few minutes searching the internet can find numerous articles discussing how bitcoin is viewed as being easier to trace than cash by law enforcement.

You need to be realistic.
i do support privacy and one day i hope to support an anonymous currency.
but..
You are being children about it.
grow up !

The way Crypto works now is that it has heavy ties to FIAT all over.
So if you want a crypto currency to go and get mass adoption you are immediately confronted with FIAT laws & regulations whether you are a stary eyed dreamer rebel or not.. it is what it is !

You are all as usual just being naive children with this whole rebel teen angst with Crypto.
Grow up and be realistic.

Do i think Snowden should be in jail for being a whistle-blower ?
Of course not.. it's a bad analogy.

I have tried ..lots.
You guys don't *WANT* to get it.. it won't benefit your FIAT bank balance.

Vanity Address ?
ya interesting point but i think the idea is to have an optional ANON implementation.. get it ?
So i am guessing it would still work with anon but not the OP's idea of using disposable addresses.

[ArticMine]

...

You need to be realistic.
i do support privacy and one day i hope to support an anonymous currency.
but..
You are being children about it.
grow up !

The way Crypto works now is that it has heavy ties to FIAT all over.
So if you want a crypto currency to go and get mass adoption you are immediately confronted with FIAT laws & regulations whether you are a stary eyed dreamer rebel or not.. it is what it is !

You are all as usual just being naive children with this whole rebel teen angst with Crypto.
Grow up and be realistic.

Do i think Snowden should be in jail for being a whistle-blower ?
Of course not.. it's a bad analogy.

I have tried ..lots.
You guys don't *WANT* to get it.. it won't benefit your FIAT bank balance.

Vanity Address ?
ya interesting point but i think the idea is to have an optional ANON implementation.. get it ?
So i am guessing it would still work with anon but not the OP's idea of using disposable addresses.

This is true, but what is being proposed on the crypto currency side is far worse by several orders of magnitude that the current reality on the fiat side. The big argument for "anon" coins will be fungibility and protecting innocent law abiding citizens from false positives generated by proprietary snake oil peddlers. Fungibility is a critical component of money and has legal precedents going back to the 18th century, if not earlier. A very good example of what I am talking about can be found in the following post. https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=1634185.msg16445385#msg16445385.

[kelsey]

The big argument for "anon" coins will be fungibility

however its a big stretch to say anon improves fungibility  . could be easily argued anon decreases fungibility especially if anon is optional.

[smoothie]

We need the optional CT.  There's no reason not to be for this.  Those who are against it need to wake up.

Think about what you are proposing...

Optional CT (even though it is only one layer of privacy) will still have the effects of a non-fungible currency. As blacklisters could just say "any LTC that uses (or has used CT in its entire history back to its coinable creation) CT we will blacklist and those LTC that don't, are fine".

The issues isn't fixed with CT.

[smoothie]

The big argument for "anon" coins will be fungibility

however its a big stretch to say anon improves fungibility  . could be easily argued anon decreases fungibility especially if anon is optional.

Hence why privacy features need to be on by default for all users/addresses.

[Shiroslullaby]

Adding an option to be anonymous causes too many complications.
It has to be all or nothing in my opinion.
You might as well fork to another currency if you are going to give people an option like that.