Hey!
What is the best way to send BTC back? One way I'm working on right now is using one address from the input in the transaction, but that isn't 100% reliable and safe. I suppose it's only a problem if there is more than one input. This is related to
https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=1770958.0 but this is more about actually sending BTC back to users.
I want it to be easy and anonymous if wanted too, but I'm not sure how to go on about it beyond using the same address that was send from. If someone want to use a different address for me to send to, I need a way to confirm it's the same person from another address. I suppose signing a message could work here.
It's tricky because I was thinking using one address for everyone to send to. However, that limits what I can do on my end regarding sending back correctly. If I generate a new address per user and create a unique link, then users can enter a new return addresses that way, but I was hoping to just use one address for people to send to, to make things easily transparent. And also because using one address makes it so much easier where I don't have to generate extra addresses and keep track of that. So, I'm not sure what approach I should take here.
This is basically a combined issue. The way I see it, there are two options:
1. Using a single address where I then send back to to one of the inputs (how to confirm it's correct one?). Not much overhead with this, but not sure how would would make sure it arrives properly if there are many inputs. Easy transparency since everyone can look up this address people send to. Although less good with anonymity. Easy for me to just use Electrum and better control over private key. Users specifying a different return address can work, but requires more work on users end to sign a message or whatnot so they can confirm one of the input addresses are owned by them.
or
2. Create one (or more) unique address(es). Better anonymity. Users can specify another return address easier. But, more overhead on my part, and would probably be better to use a online wallet since I need to create new addresses for users. Little less of transparency, although if I expose all addresses so people can look it all up, it would basically be like if I had used one address I suppose.
What do you smart people here say about this? What do you prefer? Other comments?
Thanks!
The whole point of BTC & blockchain initially was anonymity. To make BTC legal however it has to be demystified to a certain extent and the anonymous nature of BTC addresses need to be scrapped. But then again that is in direct violation of the core founding principles of blockchain & bitcoin about defying the traditional banking system.
Lectures & philosophy aside, the one way you can go about it is by creating a new breed of bitcoin
Master addresses.
These Master addresses will hold no transaction history but only a list of active and inactive sub addresses which it would generate. It would be the subaddresses that would hold all the transaction history without leaking it to the master address.
These
Sub addresses could have a certain identifier in them which would link it to the master address.
These Sub addresses will expire from time to time & new addresses have to be generated by the Master address, but thanks to the identifiers, even if a sub address expires - which would hold the transnational history, it would redirect the transaction it to the Master address and the Master address would reassign an active sub address to hold the new "refunded" transaction.
This backflow of money should only be made possible if the original transaction was made by one of the many sub addresses the Master address generated.
This idea is not without it's flaws but its something I thought of that should work.
