Bitcoin Forum
December 14, 2018, 12:03:21 AM *
News: Latest Bitcoin Core release: 0.17.0 [Torrent].
 
   Home   Help Search Login Register More  
Poll
Question: Sentiments?
You're an idiot, don't do this! - 154 (47.4%)
I don't like this, but I agree we need to move forward with it. - 26 (8%)
We should have waited longer, but I guess it needs to move forward now. - 26 (8%)
Great, it's about time! - 44 (13.5%)
You're a hero, let's get this deployed everywhere ASAP! - 49 (15.1%)
If it's from Luke, it can't be any good. - 26 (8%)
Total Voters: 325

Pages: « 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 [14] 15 »  All
  Print  
Author Topic: Miners: Time to deprioritise/filter address reuse!  (Read 51348 times)
This is a self-moderated topic. If you do not want to be moderated by the person who started this topic, create a new topic.
BurtW
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 2352
Merit: 1010

All paid signature campaigns should be banned.


View Profile WWW
November 20, 2013, 03:32:06 PM
 #261

what's so bad about address reuse anyway?
It is not about address reuse.  The issue is fungibility.

There are many posts above that explain the issue.  Just read them.

Try this one:

https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=334316.msg3588908#msg3588908

Then this one:

https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=334316.msg3589252#msg3589252

and the one after it for starters.

This entire thread is a gold mine for the issue at hand with good posts on all sides of the issue.


Our family was terrorized by Homeland Security.  Read all about it here:  http://www.jmwagner.com/ and http://www.burtw.com/  Any donations to help us recover from the $300,000 in legal fees and forced donations to the Federal Asset Forfeiture slush fund are greatly appreciated!
1544745801
Hero Member
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 1544745801

View Profile Personal Message (Offline)

Ignore
1544745801
Reply with quote  #2

1544745801
Report to moderator
Advertised sites are not endorsed by the Bitcoin Forum. They may be unsafe, untrustworthy, or illegal in your jurisdiction. Advertise here.
1544745801
Hero Member
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 1544745801

View Profile Personal Message (Offline)

Ignore
1544745801
Reply with quote  #2

1544745801
Report to moderator
1544745801
Hero Member
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 1544745801

View Profile Personal Message (Offline)

Ignore
1544745801
Reply with quote  #2

1544745801
Report to moderator
1544745801
Hero Member
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 1544745801

View Profile Personal Message (Offline)

Ignore
1544745801
Reply with quote  #2

1544745801
Report to moderator
darkmule
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1176
Merit: 1005



View Profile
November 20, 2013, 06:54:29 PM
 #262

I really don't understand why people must be FORCED to use this - i.e. get pools to enforce this rule.

But they aren't forced to use this.  Without nearly universal adoption by pools, it appears to be more a mild suggestion than a use of force.
Carlton Banks
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 2212
Merit: 1417



View Profile
November 20, 2013, 07:05:12 PM
 #263

I really don't understand why people must be FORCED to use this - i.e. get pools to enforce this rule.

Can someone answer why it MUST be done - and why the current system CAN'T be allowed to continue.

Why can't people have choice?

You CAN implement the option of accepting payments to choose to use a new address every time - so people who want that can have it.

But why are people trying to FORCE this as mandatory?

Seems like: "We know better, we will tell you what you should do and we want to force you to do it"
Sounds very religious to me ...

No-one said "lets force everyone to accept this new culture against address re-use"

What happens when your friendly neighbourhood tax barons decide they must FORCE you to use ID VERIFIED PUBLIC KEYS. Then what, Mr. Anti-Coercion?

Vires in numeris
killerstorm
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 994
Merit: 1000



View Profile
November 20, 2013, 07:27:51 PM
 #264

No-one said "lets force everyone to accept this new culture against address re-use"

What happens when your friendly neighbourhood tax barons decide they must FORCE you to use ID VERIFIED PUBLIC KEYS. Then what, Mr. Anti-Coercion?

FUD

colored coins proof-of-concept: private currencies, stock/bond p2p exchange

Tips and donations: 16v13Fa9cPmfFzpm9mmbWwAkXY4gyY6uh4
kano
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 2660
Merit: 1059


Linux since 1997 RedHat 4


View Profile
November 20, 2013, 09:23:44 PM
 #265

I really don't understand why people must be FORCED to use this - i.e. get pools to enforce this rule.

Can someone answer why it MUST be done - and why the current system CAN'T be allowed to continue.

Why can't people have choice?

You CAN implement the option of accepting payments to choose to use a new address every time - so people who want that can have it.

But why are people trying to FORCE this as mandatory?

Seems like: "We know better, we will tell you what you should do and we want to force you to do it"
Sounds very religious to me ...

No-one said "lets force everyone to accept this new culture against address re-use"

What happens when your friendly neighbourhood tax barons decide they must FORCE you to use ID VERIFIED PUBLIC KEYS. Then what, Mr. Anti-Coercion?
Interesting, you clearly misunderstand the point of the thread and then it seems that you are arguing that if govt powers FORCE people to do things then we as bitcoiners should do that also?

The FUD at the start of the first post ... since you seem to have not read it:
Quote
Addresses have always been considered single-time-use since Satoshi released the whitepaper.
While the community has tolerated reuse for things like donation addresses due to lack of convenient alternatives, it looks like the time is here early that this needs to stop.

Or would you care to explain exactly what your argument there is?

Certainly makes no sense as it is.

Pool: https://kano.is Here on Bitcointalk: Forum BTC: 1KanoPb8cKYqNrswjaA8cRDk4FAS9eDMLU
FreeNode IRC: irc.freenode.net channel #kano.is Majority developer of the ckpool code
Help keep Bitcoin secure by mining on pools with full block verification on all blocks - and NO empty blocks!
kkurtmann
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Activity: 475
Merit: 250



View Profile WWW
November 23, 2013, 06:41:14 AM
 #266

indubitably

https://www.buytrezor.com?a=55c37b866c11   well sir, I like it!
niothor
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Activity: 616
Merit: 500


Look ARROUND!


View Profile
November 23, 2013, 11:41:47 AM
 #267

I really don't understand why people must be FORCED to use this - i.e. get pools to enforce this rule.

Can someone answer why it MUST be done - and why the current system CAN'T be allowed to continue.

Why can't people have choice?

You CAN implement the option of accepting payments to choose to use a new address every time - so people who want that can have it.

But why are people trying to FORCE this as mandatory?

Seems like: "We know better, we will tell you what you should do and we want to force you to do it"
Sounds very religious to me ...

No-one said "lets force everyone to accept this new culture against address re-use"

What happens when your friendly neighbourhood tax barons decide they must FORCE you to use ID VERIFIED PUBLIC KEYS. Then what, Mr. Anti-Coercion?

So , do you know where this is going to lead?
Pools forcing people to  "x" because government is planning "y".
You open the door to pools abuse combined with government abuse , both having some stupid "reasons" to do so.


.........................................
             █████████████████
         ███ ██     █     ██ ███
       ██ █████     █     █████ ██
     ███   █   █  █████  █   █   ███
   ███     █    ███ █ ███    █     ███
  ██  ███ ██ ███    █    ███ ██ ███  ██
  ██     ████       █      █████     ██
 ███   ██ █  ███    █    ███  █ ██   ███
 █ █ ██   █     ██  █  ██     █   ██ █ █
█████     █       █████       █     █████
 █ █ ██   █   ████  █  ████   █   ██ █ █
 ███   ████ ██      █      ██ ████   ███
  ██  █  █████      █      █████  █  ██
  ██ ██   ██ ████   █  ████  ██   ██ ██
   ██      █     ██████      █     ███
     ████  █   ██████████    █  ████
       ██ █████     █    ██████ ██
         ███  ██    █   ███  ███
            █████████████████
ARROUND









.









.
Telegram
ANN Thread
Bounty Thread
Whitepaper
AtlasONo
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Activity: 551
Merit: 500



View Profile
November 23, 2013, 06:30:37 PM
 #268

I notice this change isn't mentioned in the news on the Eligius site...

Pentium100
Full Member
***
Offline Offline

Activity: 126
Merit: 100


View Profile
November 24, 2013, 12:06:16 AM
 #269

I want to reuse the addresses. A lot. Actually, I do not want to generate new addresses at all if possible. This way the backup of my wallet does not need updating.
So, my mining goes to one address, some other received coins go to another. That's it. I may even generate a vanity address in the future. I am also running Bitcoin-qt without TOR.

Why do you want to force me to use different addresses?

Using multiple addresses won't make it impossible to track me, maybe not even harder. The mining pool knows my IP and my address, so if my government manages to extract that information from them, they got me. It won't change anything if I change the address - the new one will be linked to the old one via the same pool and because some transactions will have both addresses as the source (if I send more coins than there are in one address). So, those all addresses can be linked to me with some work.

I have two ways of receiving coins - mining (address->IP link in the pool) and buying (address->name, IP, bank account link in the exchange). If I sell the coins, there is another link. So, if the government wants to track me they sure can.

1GStzEi48CnQN6DgR1s3uAzB8ucuwdcvig
Luke-Jr
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 2422
Merit: 1011



View Profile
November 24, 2013, 12:10:20 AM
 #270

Using bitcoin correctly won't stop your government from tracking you, and isn't intended to.
What it can do, is stop everyone else from tracking you.

Pentium100
Full Member
***
Offline Offline

Activity: 126
Merit: 100


View Profile
November 24, 2013, 01:05:56 AM
 #271

This way the backup of my wallet does not need updating.
BIP32 fixes that, please read the thread.
Does not look like the official client supports that. I mean there is no automatic way of doing it. I am not running some additional software. You give me and address to send the coins to, I send them to that address. If I want to receive coins from you, I will give you my address (the same one). If you somehow manage to turn it into some other address while making sure the coins reach me - great.

OTOH, I guess this patch could be circumvented by pre-generating as many addresses as I need (transactions per block) and giving them on a round-robin basis. Which still requires giving possible a different address each time someone wants to send coins to me. OTOH, I could just give a list of them and ask to choose one at random. That is static, but still inconvenient (and most would choose the first one in the list anyway).

It is inconvenient, no matter how you look at it.

Using bitcoin correctly won't stop your government from tracking you, and isn't intended to.
What it can do, is stop everyone else from tracking you.
However, I believe that everyone should decide that for themselves instead of having it basically forced on them (yea, yea, "miners can choose with transactions to include in the block, so there will be at least one miner who run an unaltered client, so your transaction will be included some time before the end of the universe" but it is effectively forcing me to do this).
Just like millions of people use Facebook and share everything about themselves (I am not one of them).

However, this affects not only the destination but also source addresses as I understand it. So, if I have mined a lot of coins (and on Eligius, all coins go to a single address, can't really change it, can I?) I have to wait longer if I want to make a few smaller purchases? Actually, same applies to coins bought in an exchange - unless I want to spend time manually withdrawing to different addresses.

I like the current system where I can keep coins received by mining in one address (so if I see the notification that 1P5p... received coins I know it is from mining, 175... means LabRat paid dividends etc).

1GStzEi48CnQN6DgR1s3uAzB8ucuwdcvig
Luke-Jr
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 2422
Merit: 1011



View Profile
November 24, 2013, 01:13:25 AM
 #272

Does not look like the official client supports that.
There is no official client, or official anything. Official implies centralisation.

However, I believe that everyone should decide that for themselves
Address reuse takes away that choice from other users.
Using a unique address per transaction, as Bitcoin was always intended to be used, allows each user to choose for themselves whether they want their transaction record public or not.

However, this affects not only the destination but also source addresses as I understand it.
There are no source addresses.
Addresses are only ever used to receive.

So, if I have mined a lot of coins (and on Eligius, all coins go to a single address, can't really change it, can I?) I have to wait longer if I want to make a few smaller purchases? Actually, same applies to coins bought in an exchange - unless I want to spend time manually withdrawing to different addresses.
Yes, if you use Bitcoin wrong, this will make your transactions take slightly longer to confirm.
That's intentional.
I will continue to work closely with wizkid057 to ensure Eligius gets support for BIP32 as soon as possible.

I like the current system where I can keep coins received by mining in one address (so if I see the notification that 1P5p... received coins I know it is from mining, 175... means LabRat paid dividends etc).
Future software versions implementing BIP32 should be able to notify you based on the recurring invoice id used.

Pentium100
Full Member
***
Offline Offline

Activity: 126
Merit: 100


View Profile
November 24, 2013, 01:42:49 AM
 #273

Does not look like the official client supports that.
There is no official client, or official anything. Official implies centralisation.
OK, maybe I chose a bad term. I meant Bitcoin-qt - the original client. The one that comes closest to being "official" and keeps the full blockchain.
After all, bitcoin.org is the first link that Google shows when searching for Bitcoin. That is a de-facto "official" website and a website I send people to to learn about Bitcoin. Bitcoin-qt is the client I first started using (there were no others back in CPU-mining days) and other clients are not compatible with its wallet format, so I can't really change it now.
Quote
So, if I have mined a lot of coins (and on Eligius, all coins go to a single address, can't really change it, can I?) I have to wait longer if I want to make a few smaller purchases? Actually, same applies to coins bought in an exchange - unless I want to spend time manually withdrawing to different addresses.
Yes, if you use Bitcoin wrong, this will make your transactions take slightly longer to confirm.
That's intentional.
I will continue to work closely with wizkid057 to ensure Eligius gets support for BIP32 as soon as possible.
Hopefully it won't be forced until Bitcoin-qt supports it.

1GStzEi48CnQN6DgR1s3uAzB8ucuwdcvig
Luke-Jr
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 2422
Merit: 1011



View Profile
November 24, 2013, 01:50:54 AM
 #274

Hopefully it won't be forced until Bitcoin-qt supports it.
I don't expect it to ever be forced at the blockchain level.

Pentium100
Full Member
***
Offline Offline

Activity: 126
Merit: 100


View Profile
November 24, 2013, 02:12:21 AM
 #275

Hopefully it won't be forced until Bitcoin-qt supports it.
I don't expect it to ever be forced at the blockchain level.
I mean by Eligius I hope I can contiue to use Bitcoin-qt without having to somehow also accommodate BIP32 until it is included in that client.

1GStzEi48CnQN6DgR1s3uAzB8ucuwdcvig
justusranvier
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1400
Merit: 1006



View Profile WWW
November 24, 2013, 02:28:30 AM
 #276

I want to reuse the addresses. A lot. Actually, I do not want to generate new addresses at all if possible. This way the backup of my wallet does not need updating.
Thank Satoshi for bad planning when it came to wallets, and switch to Armory instead.
Cryddit
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 910
Merit: 1037


View Profile
November 24, 2013, 02:48:55 AM
 #277


I don't see the problem with mining.  You don't need to give the pool a payment address until it's time for you to take your balance.  You can put *MONTHS* or even *YEARS* of mining output in a single tx, in a single address -- furthermore, doing so will cause you way less expense in the long run, because otherwise you'll have "dust" in that address that will cost you in transaction fees a significant fraction of whatever you spend.

Honestly, the whole interface would work better IMO if people's balance showed the expected amount that they can actually spend, *AFTER* transaction fees are deducted.  That would dispel illusions like getting "just as much Bitcoin" by getting mining paid daily as by getting it paid annually.  It would also go a long way toward making transaction fees easier to deal with; showing people their actual buying power as opposed to a number 30% or more of which may be illusory if their wallet is mostly "dust".

There's a huge distinction in fees between many tiny txouts and one big txout, regardless of the number of addresses they are sent to.  The argument about wanting to get many teeny-tiny mining payments at a single address shows that at least some users just aren't getting that distinction. Because it looks exactly the same in your wallet until you get REAMED on transaction fees when you try to spend it, it's too easy to miss. 

Pentium100
Full Member
***
Offline Offline

Activity: 126
Merit: 100


View Profile
November 24, 2013, 03:04:43 AM
 #278


I don't see the problem with mining.  You don't need to give the pool a payment address until it's time for you to take your balance.  You can put *MONTHS* or even *YEARS* of mining output in a single tx, in a single address -- furthermore, doing so will cause you way less expense in the long run, because otherwise you'll have "dust" in that address that will cost you in transaction fees a significant fraction of whatever you spend.
Not really, I have set 0.2BTC as the automatic payout and I think it is normal for me - I get it about every 4 days. Also, 0.2BTC is about $150 at current rate, so it's not "dust".
Sure, if I mined with USB Block erupter and wanted to be paid every day then yes, there would be too many transactions.

Quote
There's a huge distinction in fees between many tiny txouts and one big txout, regardless of the number of addresses they are sent to.  The argument about wanting to get many teeny-tiny mining payments at a single address shows that at least some users just aren't getting that distinction. Because it looks exactly the same in your wallet until you get REAMED on transaction fees when you try to spend it, it's too easy to miss. 
With 60GH/s I get 0.2BTC every ~four days. Also, I am risking at most 0.2BTC (let's say the pool server crashes and there are no backups) I am sure people with 1TH or higher hashrate would not want to wait very long for their coin.

I want to reuse the addresses. A lot. Actually, I do not want to generate new addresses at all if possible. This way the backup of my wallet does not need updating.
Thank Satoshi for bad planning when it came to wallets, and switch to Armory instead.
Does it support the wallet.dat from the original client?
Does it support the block database from the original client (I do not want to wait another two weeks for the new client to download the blockchain).

1GStzEi48CnQN6DgR1s3uAzB8ucuwdcvig
justusranvier
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1400
Merit: 1006



View Profile WWW
November 24, 2013, 03:10:43 AM
 #279

Does it support the wallet.dat from the original client?
Does it support the block database from the original client (I do not want to wait another two weeks for the new client to download the blockchain).
Does not directly support wallet.dat, but if you've only got a couple addresses it's easy to import them.

Armory relies on either bitcoind or Bitcoin-Qt to connect to the network and download the blockchain for it, so you can just install Armory alongside your existing Bitcoin-Qt installation and it will just use that.

Even better you can set up bitcoind to constantly run in the background as a service and just use Armory when you need to make a transaction.
Pentium100
Full Member
***
Offline Offline

Activity: 126
Merit: 100


View Profile
November 24, 2013, 03:56:48 AM
 #280

Does not directly support wallet.dat, but if you've only got a couple addresses it's easy to import them.

Armory relies on either bitcoind or Bitcoin-Qt to connect to the network and download the blockchain for it, so you can just install Armory alongside your existing Bitcoin-Qt installation and it will just use that.
But it can't use the bitcoind wallet trough RPC?
Quote
Even better you can set up bitcoind to constantly run in the background as a service and just use Armory when you need to make a transaction.
I have a VM dedicated to various coins with their services running constantly (takes very long to download the missing blocks in the chain and to verify the block index, but the PC can keep up with the network quite well).

Hmm... Armory is available in two versions -  0.88.1-beta (64bit only, uses lots of RAM) and 0.89.99.16-testing (Vista, 7, 8 only, uses less RAM).
No version that would work on Windows 2003 32bit...

1GStzEi48CnQN6DgR1s3uAzB8ucuwdcvig
Pages: « 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 [14] 15 »  All
  Print  
 
Jump to:  

Sponsored by , a Bitcoin-accepting VPN.
Powered by MySQL Powered by PHP Powered by SMF 1.1.19 | SMF © 2006-2009, Simple Machines Valid XHTML 1.0! Valid CSS!