The weakness of blockchain is the identification of a person

[darkangel11]

I am really getting tired of these arguments. If I wanted to buy drugs or guns or some other blackmarket transaction today you know what I would use? Cash. The US dollar. Untraceable and not able to be monitored. Seriously, we already have the perfect black market and money laundering tool made by our own government. The only thing they want is control. They want to control and monitor everything. They are afraid. So they claim all sorts of bad things will be done with the new form of money. Right.

Exactly. Bitcoin is not there to work as an anonymous way to pay for illegal goods. Those who are risking it all hoping they can't be found may end up like Ross or many others.

Of course BTC is also anonymous to some extent. Once you haven't shared your ID on an exchange or paid for any physical goods your funds are untraceable, because your address is just a bunch of numbers and letters. Nobody will be able to identify you through that. That is until exchanges allow people to buy BTC without verification. Once this window closes they'll be able to identify newcomers. Only long time holders will be relatively safe.

[1714867210]

1714867210

[1714867210]

1714867210

[1714867210]

1714867210

[Qartersa]

Active use of blockchain in everyday’s life allows us solving a lot of problems, especially in the financial sphere. One of the problems with using this technology is customer identification. It's not always possible to successfully identify a partner.
Microsoft will decide this problem with BlockStack Labs and ConsenSus. They plan to develop a solution to simplify the identification based on the blockchain. For this they will use the solutions uPort and OneName that were written for Ethereum and Bitcoin accordingly. The product will be released in three months.
Such a platform may carry some interest for future ICO.

All of that said, what is your point in posting this? Would you like the aspect of annonymity to be discussed or the specific service those companies will be offering?

I think, though, that it is far impossible to implement something that would allow anyone to identify anyone that is careful in using bitcoins. For example, I can just make a new address every time I make a transaction and never link any address to one another. Then tumble every transaction I will get. I will exercise every precaution not to get identified, so then what is the purpose of their project now?

[Yakamoto]

Active use of blockchain in everyday’s life allows us solving a lot of problems, especially in the financial sphere. One of the problems with using this technology is customer identification. It's not always possible to successfully identify a partner.
Microsoft will decide this problem with BlockStack Labs and ConsenSus. They plan to develop a solution to simplify the identification based on the blockchain. For this they will use the solutions uPort and OneName that were written for Ethereum and Bitcoin accordingly. The product will be released in three months.
Such a platform may carry some interest for future ICO.

After enough addresses it becomes a guess, at best, if the person still owns a certain amount of bitcoin, and online wallets make it even easier to obfuscate one's identity with the changing addresses. If someone really wanted to worry about someone tracking them they could have a desktop address as their "incoming" wallet, send varying portions to an online wallet, and then send them back to another desktop wallet. Then it suddenly becomes nearly impossible to know for certain who owns what, assuming they have a starting address to go off of an nothing else.

I should actually start doing something like that. Considering I thought of that on the spot, essentially, it doesn't sound like too bad of a plan.

[Roboabhishek]

Why is the identification of a person such a big deal though? In the first place, isn't anonymity(to a certain extent) one of the best features of bitcoin? Whereas you wouldn't need to have an email address, an account, or whatever kind of validation for you to have a wallet and use it? Customer identification being unaffiliated with their wallets isn't a weakness. It's actually one of the strengths of bitcoin.

I dont think that they can trace any user of blackchain unless he's using custom private key generated by himself/herself .
Bcoz new blockchain is using account system in which they suggest you to deposit money into a new generated address by blockchain and it will automatically gets credited into blockchain account.
So u cannot be traced after by using new address everytime.

[darkangel11]

Active use of blockchain in everyday’s life allows us solving a lot of problems, especially in the financial sphere. One of the problems with using this technology is customer identification. It's not always possible to successfully identify a partner.
Microsoft will decide this problem with BlockStack Labs and ConsenSus. They plan to develop a solution to simplify the identification based on the blockchain. For this they will use the solutions uPort and OneName that were written for Ethereum and Bitcoin accordingly. The product will be released in three months.
Such a platform may carry some interest for future ICO.

After enough addresses it becomes a guess, at best, if the person still owns a certain amount of bitcoin, and online wallets make it even easier to obfuscate one's identity with the changing addresses. If someone really wanted to worry about someone tracking them they could have a desktop address as their "incoming" wallet, send varying portions to an online wallet, and then send them back to another desktop wallet. Then it suddenly becomes nearly impossible to know for certain who owns what, assuming they have a starting address to go off of an nothing else.

I should actually start doing something like that. Considering I thought of that on the spot, essentially, it doesn't sound like too bad of a plan.

Another good idea is sending your money to exchanges for a couple days. Even if you don't trade chances are your coins will end up on their cold wallet and once you withdraw you'll be paid from the hot wallet with somebody else's coins. People were using a similar system back when mixers weren't popular and trusted. They were sending coins to a casino, playing there with very small bets and withdrawing. Their coins were ending up mixed with the coins that belonged to the casino.

Bitcoin is as anonymous as you want it to be.

[franky1]

the weakness of blockchain is not identification

if your transacting with someone, its up to YOU to do personal due diligence
no bank note on the planet is stamped with the holders life story. its up to the people trading bank notes to vet and decide who they hand bank notes to.

you dont need to force people to stamp their life story to bank notes or register details with a identity company to trade bank notes.. you simply get the people to decide should they hand their bank notes to a complete stranger or get to know someone enough or vet the risks of what will happen if they hand over a bank note..

same rule applies with bitcoin.

the weakness of blockchain, is the lack of education of personal responsibility

[yadi cihuy]

I think a bitcoin active user does not need to be identified because this is the nature of anonymous bitcoin, Ie it is not a threat but rather it is a good thing for bitcoin users. Without long verification and easy transactions. Identify the bitcoin user for me the thing that makes me complicated .. not simple

[CrewKitten]

If someone has to make his identifications clearly its okay, its not that when you give your identification you are already exposing yourself to danger, besides if you are not doing something wrong why would you be scared at all? In some point some measures are being given to users like identification for the verification of user, and aside from that if they would neglect it and then the user is doing  bad things then it they would be the ones being blame and their company's at stake. Your identity is still safe.

[GreenBits]

I think the uPort and OneName technology is truly needed. Although there has been no obstacle to the identification of ownership of meaningful Address. But we need a new one. I can't wait to know the technology.

With bitcoin and ETH, this actually doesn't make that much sense.

Wallets are supposed to be cycled all the time, and not reused. I'm not aware of the specifics of both of the protocols you mentioned, but unless they specifically aren't bitcoin, then this ruins the fresh address paradigm. Bitcoin is anan by nature; it's much easier to do this with a more centralized coin like Ripple. This would essentially compromise your security to bad actors as well, by making your coin movements more traceable. it would really need to be a worthy reason to implement this, or this seems like a needless drag on the network.

Besides, way cheaper/easier to just monitor the Fiat/Crypto conversion points.

[timerland]

Active use of blockchain in everyday’s life allows us solving a lot of problems, especially in the financial sphere. One of the problems with using this technology is customer identification. It's not always possible to successfully identify a partner.
Microsoft will decide this problem with BlockStack Labs and ConsenSus. They plan to develop a solution to simplify the identification based on the blockchain. For this they will use the solutions uPort and OneName that were written for Ethereum and Bitcoin accordingly. The product will be released in three months.
Such a platform may carry some interest for future ICO.

IMO this is exactly why blockchain technology and bitcoin should be used.

A person can voluntarily reveal their identity, but most people will choose to stay anonymous.

Only when you are identified as not yourself but rather a unique identifier which can be changed at any time can it guarantee freedom of speech. Otherwise, people may discriminate you because of your race etc.

Anyways, what do you need a person's ID for apart from stalking them to collect taxes which is non-existent in bitcoin?

[Razick]

Why is this a weakness? Bitcoin was never meant to keep you anonymous. It was meant to allow you to control your money - to be your own bank. A way to secure your funds, your life without the need for a middleman. Even if your identity can be found, the only time it matter is if you are doing something illegal which in any case has consequences like fiat.

[Rahar02]

In most cases to transact use bitcoin, no need to verify your id unless you want to convert bitcoin into fiat currency through an exchange. Bitcoin is pseudonymous and not 100% anonymous as all of bitcoin transactions recorded in blockchain, but in one or another way it can be fully anonymous if you know how to.  So, you can provide id in some transactions but don't have to provide id for every transaction that you've made.

[NEUROSEED]

Do I understand that right? They want to bind wallets to people?
For economic reasons that might be not so bad.
After all, when you do business you want to know with who you are dealing with. It could bring legal clearance.
I suppose they need the permission of the people to do something like that first.
Imagine they make a mistake and you suddenly become the owner of the wallet of some drug lord...

Usually, there are 2 to the power 256 possible unique addresses in a  cryptocurrency. It is enough for all potension addresses to avoid  collisions. You cann't get anyone's private key un it will be given to you. If government make it available cryptographers will create high security solutions.

[carlisle1]

Because bitcoin indeed designed that users to keep its anonymous, we know the creator of bitcoin is satoshi nakamoto that until now we never know the truth about satoshi nakamoto.

this is a good example and how that can be a weakness if we seen a big rise happen after nakamoto build this type of system support approach after
several years and I think it will continue even some lapses has been questioned I think it will be overcome in the run.

[Rishabh riyz]

I think a bitcoin active user does not need to be identified because this is the nature of anonymous bitcoin, Ie it is not a threat but rather it is a good thing for bitcoin users. Without long verification and easy transactions. Identify the bitcoin user for me the thing that makes me complicated .. not simple

well bitcoins where made to provide us financial freedom so that we would not need any bank to handle our earnings and ply according  to their rules ,
identification of bitcoin users wont make things complicated ,the anonymous identity would make .
one of the main reason why governments are not accepting bitcoins  as a global currency is that people can misuse this feature of bitcoins by buying illegal stuffs like drugs and that BTC can also be used for funding of terrorism . then all we would get to know is 2 wallet address and nothing more.
the country would then become a shadow market zone where anyone would buy anything and the government would know nothing .

[CryptoRobert]

Active use of blockchain in everyday’s life allows us solving a lot of problems, especially in the financial sphere. One of the problems with using this technology is customer identification. It's not always possible to successfully identify a partner.
Microsoft will decide this problem with BlockStack Labs and ConsenSus. They plan to develop a solution to simplify the identification based on the blockchain. For this they will use the solutions uPort and OneName that were written for Ethereum and Bitcoin accordingly. The product will be released in three months.
Such a platform may carry some interest for future ICO.

Is there any bitcointalk thread dedicated to the Blockstack project? I didn't find any so far, but I am interested to learn more on what they are doing.

[stompix]

Why is the identification of a person such a big deal though? In the first place, isn't anonymity(to a certain extent) one of the best features of bitcoin? Whereas you wouldn't need to have an email address, an account, or whatever kind of validation for you to have a wallet and use it? Customer identification being unaffiliated with their wallets isn't a weakness. It's actually one of the strengths of bitcoin.

I dont think that they can trace any user of blackchain unless he's using custom private key generated by himself/herself .

How can you trace somebody if he is using a private key generated by himself?
By the way, the term is vanity address, because we all generate addresses when we use our wallets

Why is this a weakness? Bitcoin was never meant to keep you anonymous. It was meant to allow you to control your money - to be your own bank. A way to secure your funds, your life without the need for a middleman. Even if your identity can be found, the only time it matter is if you are doing something illegal which in any case has consequences like fiat.

.

Are you sure?
https://bitcoin.org/bitcoin.pdf

The necessity to announce all transactions publicly
precludes this method, but privacy can still be maintained by breaking the flow of information in
another place: by keeping public keys anonymous. The public can see that someone is sending
an amount to someone else, but without information linking the transaction to anyone.

Seems like Satoshi had a different opinion, he thought how somebody who wants to be anonymous can achieve that.

If someone has to make his identifications clearly its okay, its not that when you give your identification you are already exposing yourself to danger, besides if you are not doing something wrong why would you be scared at all?

The moment somebody gets access to your information it's the moment you're in trouble.
You probably haven't done anything wrong, the I'm sure you're comfortable with telling us your name, location, workplace and show us all the tx you have made with btc.
Ready to do it?