Someone sending out MilliBits

[HELP.org]

..

[Taras]

https://blockchain.info/tx/90087eef265335c807ae2559793913e57321765462a2abcb58027e6751eb58e6
I wonder why they're giving to random addresses like this.

[willphase]

https://blockchain.info/tx/90087eef265335c807ae2559793913e57321765462a2abcb58027e6751eb58e6
I wonder why they're giving to random addresses like this.

They are trying to entice the addresses to consolidate the funds, thus proving linkages between addresses in order to defeat pseudonymity.

Before the RNG bug was well known, some people were also using this technique to trying to entice spends from addresses from devices with weak RNG so they can perform a private key disclosure.

Will

[coastermonger]

So what you're saying is, if you suspect someone is enticing you to consolidate funds, you should probably move the funds to an exchange and cash them out and buy back in, or move your bitcoins through a coin mixer before moving them again? 

[willphase]

So what you're saying is, if you suspect someone is enticing you to consolidate funds, you should probably move the funds to an exchange and cash them out and buy back in, or move your bitcoins through a coin mixer before moving them again? 

or just leave the extra bitcoins in there until you actually want to spend the bitcoins.

Will

[Kluge]

https://blockchain.info/tx/90087eef265335c807ae2559793913e57321765462a2abcb58027e6751eb58e6
I wonder why they're giving to random addresses like this.

They are trying to entice the addresses to consolidate the funds, thus proving linkages between addresses in order to defeat pseudonymity.

Before the RNG bug was well known, some people were also using this technique to trying to entice spends from addresses from devices with weak RNG so they can perform a private key disclosure.

Will

This behavior has been happening since almost the beginning of Bitcoin. This is the conclusion arrived at last time I saw a discussion on it (though it wasn't related to RNG flaw). It's difficult to really determine why it happens, though. AFAIK, they haven't been connected to thefts of coins from people who've ever received them. Other theories are more tin-foil-y. 

[Ente]

..that person is on it again.
Check this out:
https://blockchain.info/address/1FFirnLctcZxVx5otnLNZ4dDGUkMBM4vNr

The outputs are totally random - even satoshidice and deepbit are on the list. Several thousands there, it seems.
Well, thanks for the 10c. Good luck with messing with my vanitygen address. *shrugs*

Ente

[vandeam]

sorry can this be simplified for me 

[Mike Christ]

sorry can this be simplified for me 

Tiny amounts of Bitcoin are potentially being used to track who owns which addresses.

[Ente]

Also, one scenario could be that people receive (milli)bitcoins and go on send them elsewhere. When you send a transaction out, you publish your (real) public key (which is something different to your public bitcoin address). If the privat+public key pair was created insecurely, the attacker ow knows the public key and might be able to steal all funds from that address.

BUT: Why the heck does the attacker here send millibits to addresses which already did transactions? Where the public key is already published and known?
So, this can't really be the reason.

Analyzing who owns which addresses? Doesn't really make sense, with just a handfull he scraped from bitcointalk and similar.

So, my guess is it's something with tainting other coins.

Ente

[gmaxwell]

So, my guess is it's something with tainting other coins.

Users of bitcoind / bitcoin-qt can fight back against this by using Peter Todd's (retep on BCT) dust-b-gone script which will CoinJoin away the dust in your wallet, both cleaning up the blockchain and thwarting any tainting efforts.

[auzaar]

Just putting the source address so that it comes up in search
1FFirnLctcZxVx5otnLNZ4dDGUkMBM4vNr

[dddbtc]

That's generous of you to offer an exchange, but I think they're fine.

Here's the address of the coin with extra BTC on it: https://blockchain.info/address/13EboHof8EoyB3xW4tssrsufhQtaQmymhS - address 1FFirnLctcZxVx5otnLNZ4dDGUkMBM4vNr is being a Bitcoin fairy and sending Bitcoins to a bunch of addresses. That same address previously sent a whole bunch of 1BTC to many, many addresses and then 100BTC to two addresses and 25BTC to one address. My first thought was that was Casascius loading his coins and then doing... something sending a little extra. But spot-checking the 1BTC addresses doesn't show what I would expect in this case, which would be that all those addresses just had one (or two) transactions to them, and they all hold a nice round 1BTC (or 1.001BTC), but that's not really what I'm seeing. A mystery!

[Lauda]

This is mysterious. 

[allthingsluxury]

Very strange.

[itod]

Also, one scenario could be that people receive (milli)bitcoins and go on send them elsewhere. When you send a transaction out, you publish your (real) public key (which is something different to your public bitcoin address). If the privat+public key pair was created insecurely, the attacker ow knows the public key and might be able to steal all funds from that address.

BUT: Why the heck does the attacker here send millibits to addresses which already did transactions? Where the public key is already published and known?
So, this can't really be the reason.

Analyzing who owns which addresses? Doesn't really make sense, with just a handfull he scraped from bitcointalk and similar.

So, my guess is it's something with tainting other coins.

Ente

Maybe it's not just the public key, if the receiver sends this dust out to consolidate the wallet he may reveal his real IP address if his peer is listening, getting info for potential attack on the wallet later. I wonder if those addresses that receive dust have:
a) above average amount of BTC in them, meaning not particular BTC address but the wallet that holds that BTC address.
b) local wallet, not web wallet

[int03h]

https://blockchain.info/tx/cf2d7091de839cead9d677d6fb050d4278f17bfca3e74cf80198197346ba4a3d

Another round it seems. Thanks Who-Ever-You-Are.

[crazy_rabbit]

https://blockchain.info/tx/90087eef265335c807ae2559793913e57321765462a2abcb58027e6751eb58e6
I wonder why they're giving to random addresses like this.

They are trying to entice the addresses to consolidate the funds, thus proving linkages between addresses in order to defeat pseudonymity.

Before the RNG bug was well known, some people were also using this technique to trying to entice spends from addresses from devices with weak RNG so they can perform a private key disclosure.

Will

Exactly. If you keep track of where coins start, and where they end up, you can 'color' the entire transaction tree. Think of a river that runs backwards from the sea. You dump dye in the water at the delta, the mouth, and watch is flow back up track all the estuaries. Not an elegant example, but you get the point. You could track water back to the smallest creek.

Thats whats happening here.

[quone17]

https://blockchain.info/tx/90087eef265335c807ae2559793913e57321765462a2abcb58027e6751eb58e6
I wonder why they're giving to random addresses like this.

They are trying to entice the addresses to consolidate the funds, thus proving linkages between addresses in order to defeat pseudonymity.

Before the RNG bug was well known, some people were also using this technique to trying to entice spends from addresses from devices with weak RNG so they can perform a private key disclosure.

Will

Exactly. If you keep track of where coins start, and where they end up, you can 'color' the entire transaction tree. Think of a river that runs backwards from the sea. You dump dye in the water at the delta, the mouth, and watch is flow back up track all the estuaries. Not an elegant example, but you get the point. You could track water back to the smallest creek.

Thats whats happening here.

God bless you for understanding this, because I sure as heck don't.  I thought BTC was anonymous, and I didn't think I was putting myself and my BTC address at risk by sending BTC to another address.  If that's what you're saying, I'm nervous.

[Ente]

https://blockchain.info/tx/90087eef265335c807ae2559793913e57321765462a2abcb58027e6751eb58e6
I wonder why they're giving to random addresses like this.

They are trying to entice the addresses to consolidate the funds, thus proving linkages between addresses in order to defeat pseudonymity.

Before the RNG bug was well known, some people were also using this technique to trying to entice spends from addresses from devices with weak RNG so they can perform a private key disclosure.

Will

Exactly. If you keep track of where coins start, and where they end up, you can 'color' the entire transaction tree. Think of a river that runs backwards from the sea. You dump dye in the water at the delta, the mouth, and watch is flow back up track all the estuaries. Not an elegant example, but you get the point. You could track water back to the smallest creek.

Thats whats happening here.

God bless you for understanding this, because I sure as heck don't.  I thought BTC was anonymous, and I didn't think I was putting myself and my BTC address at risk by sending BTC to another address.  If that's what you're saying, I'm nervous.

Well, Bitcoin isn't anonymous. It is, however, pseudonymous. That means you can distinguish individual payments, amounts and addresses, just just don't know which address belongs to whom.
With this technique (sending out tiny amounts), as well as a few others, one can figure out which individual addresses belong to the same user and/or wallet. For example, if you receive one dust amount to an "anonymous" address of your wallet, and spend it together with funds from an address you have written in your signature, everyone (who cares to look) knows that the first, "anonymous" address belongs to the user quone.

Not more, not less.

But yes, the public opinion on one hand, and the technical facts on the other hand about anonymity/pseudonymity are a reason to become nervous ;-)

Ente