Privacy of bitcoin transaction holders?

[nursahath07]

We can see that traditional banking models achieve different level of  privacy and limitation process of information company’s own systems or adopting third party suggestion and process and bitcoin transaction holder have some similar facility like public can see  that some one can send money to another person for specific purpose but its happen without giving others information to anyone. I think its similar like stock exchange systems. Even not providing full details of any parties we can continuing trade in public. otherwise transaction can be sued by new key pairs and keep them linked to common owner.

[dektox]

In some questions, bitcoin is far more easy to track than traditional banking schemes (with such jurisdictions like Panama or Cyprus). MtGox theft tracking proves it.

[squatz1]

In some questions, bitcoin is far more easy to track than traditional banking schemes (with such jurisdictions like Panama or Cyprus). MtGox theft tracking proves it.

Yeah, a lot of people have this common misconception (due to media coverage of Bitcoin) that Bitcoin is something that is hard to track, anonymous, only used for drugs, and so on and so forth. Bitcoin itself is easy to track, there is a PUBLIC TRANSPARENT blockchain which can be looked into with some forensic analysis to find out things about the sender. This usually allows for people to find out who someone is, or at least who they're associated with.

There is no privacy, unless you create it by being SUPER SUPER CAREFUL with bitcoin.

[Hydrogen]

Identity theft, financial fraud and theft of funds are much more common in traditional banking systems than they are in crypto currencies.

In terms of privacy, a case could be made for bitcoin doing a better job of protecting the identity and financial data of its userbase than banks or credit card companies could hope to.

Its common to see news stories where millions of credit numbers and financial data are stolen. Even the SEC was compromised earlier this year with the hack of their EDGAR system.

In theory, banks offer more "security" and "privacy". But watching the 6 o'clock news might tell a very different story.

[entrepmind23]

Bitcoin holders to some extent has anonymity than having accounts in bank do because in bitcoin, there is no need to disclose names when sending and receiving money while in banks, names are required in order for the transaction to get through because there would be confirmation from both sides, the sending and recipient banks.

However, there would be cases when bitcoin holders can still be known if they registered in exchanges because most of the time it is the only gateway to enter the cryptoworld and the local exchanges has all the information because they require verification documents when dealing with fiat money and the government can just easily ask for the information and amount transacted if they will have enough reason to do so.

[fiulpro]

To put it simply lets take an example.. when you are in a campaign and funds are transferred then..what happens is that..the manager posts..the address of the transactions and you can literally track everything thats going on...
There...you see the address ... Funds that were transferred and also when, where, time limit..and everything else too
..thats really so easy ..to track someone through bitcoins... Anyone has accessibility to it...the only thing thats private is ... Bitcoin address and that too..can be dealt with. .