Antinalysis - free tool to check the dirtyness of bitcoin address

[DaveF]

Or it's just spewing random garbage.
I went to the chipmixer campaign spreadsheet for week 231 and pulled 2 addresses.
1 was mine the other was someone else.
Got 2 totally different things as to the source of the funds. To the extent that it only popped as coming from an exchange for the other address.

-Dave

[1714893708]

1714893708

[1714893708]

1714893708

[1714893708]

1714893708

[1714893708]

1714893708

[1714893708]

1714893708

[o_e_l_e_o]

Got 2 totally different things as to the source of the funds.

Were both addresses used only for receiving campaign payments, or were there coins from other sources too?

Or it's just spewing random garbage.

Which makes you wonder which exchanges or blockchain analysis companies are employing the same (or some of the same) methods which are being utilized here. If it is so completely arbitrary/random, then it just lends more weight to what I've always said: Taint is completely meaningless bullshit.

[PrimeNumber7]

A potential criminal could deposit their coin today, and tomorrow, it could be alledged that the particular coin deposited was associated with criminal activity. Binance could accept the deposit because they would have no way of knowing about the alleged theft, while a chain analysis company, looking at the transaction months (or later) after the fact might know about the alleged theft.

That is maybe true for the odd deposit here or there, but the two addresses I checked above have somewhere approaching 25% of their funds coming from known hacks, known scams, on blacklists, known darknet markets, etc. These are addresses which have processed tens or even hundreds of thousands of bitcoin. This pattern is repeated across a number of other exchange addresses I pulled from https://www.walletexplorer.com/

There is obviously a long standing pattern of exchanges being very inconsistent as to what they consider tainted and what they consider clean, and every exchange will have their own metrics. This means that coins you think are clean may still be treated as tainted by some exchanges but not others, and coins you withdraw from some exchanges may not be clean in the eyes of other exchanges.

As I've said many times, taint is completely arbitrary and completely meaningless, and we should, as a community, stop supporting centralized exchanges which enforce this complete nonsense.

When Tim Draper, for example, bought the seized coin from Silk Road, any automated "taint analysis" would show 100% of the coin came from a darknet market.

The above is one example of why any "taint analysis" should include individual judgment as to if a particular deposit should be accepted or not. I cannot speak to why exchanges may block any particular account, however, I would note that exchanges have a clear incentive against blocking accounts for arbitrary reasons. I would also note that a customer can bring legal action against an exchange if the exchange disallows withdrawals.

[DaveF]

Got 2 totally different things as to the source of the funds.

Were both addresses used only for receiving campaign payments, or were there coins from other sources too?

Or it's just spewing random garbage.

Which makes you wonder which exchanges or blockchain analysis companies are employing the same (or some of the same) methods which are being utilized here. If it is so completely arbitrary/random, then it just lends more weight to what I've always said: Taint is completely meaningless bullshit.

Mine was just the campaign. From what I could see so was the other, but since it's not mine and I did not look at EVERY input I can't be sure.
BUT and let me be clear, mine was the 'dirty' one the other was clean. So unless they had a few $0 payment weeks and those weeks happened to be the ones with 'dirty' coins then it's all BS

-Dave

[FatFork]

In my test of two separate addresses (unrelated to each other) that were both funded with only one transaction from the Binance hot wallet, I got the same results. Therefore, it appears the tool does make a bit of sense.



However, I am not sure if tainting addresses in that manner makes much sense. According to this, all addresses that have ever received coins from the Binance exchange will be associated with suspicious and illegal activities.

[o_e_l_e_o]

The above is one example of why any "taint analysis" should include individual judgment as to if a particular deposit should be accepted or not.

And how many exchanges or blockchain analysis companies do you think are doing that for the average user who is depositing amounts less than 1 BTC? Maybe in Draper's case when they are dealing with ~30,000 BTC then it becomes worth their time for someone to sit down and manually check things (especially when it is so easily identified as in Draper's case), but for the average user with small amounts of funds from a variety or sources which flag up with a variety of taint reasons, then it is absolutely not worth their time. Why spend their own money to look in to when they can just lock the account and demand ridiculous amounts of KYC instead?

I would also note that a customer can bring legal action against an exchange if the exchange disallows withdrawals.

Maybe you know otherwise, but I am unaware of literally any successful cases by an individual user against a major exchange which locked their account or seized their coins.

However, I am not sure if tainting addresses in that manner makes much sense.

Tainting addresses in any manner makes no sense. As soon as a transaction, any transaction, has taken place, then you cannot say that those coins have not changed hands in a perfectly legal manner, such as buying goods from another person or being sold peer to peer. If we applied this taint nonsense to fiat, then every single coin or bill in circulation would be tainted.

According to this, all addresses that have ever received coins from the Binance exchange will be associated with suspicious and illegal activities.

All the more reason for people to ignore taint and stop supporting exchanges like Binance which implement it.

[dkbit98]

As I've said many times, taint is completely arbitrary and completely meaningless, and we should, as a community, stop supporting centralized exchanges which enforce this complete nonsense.

If you are good friend with CZ I am sure that he can make your ''taint'' clean with a simple click of a button, that is how their bias analytics really work.
I can understand why someone wants to stop hackers and people who stole bitcoins, but there are much better way than doing this.
Just imagine rouge employee of chainalysis manually flagging any address he wants, or making some unintentional mistake that could ruin lives.

In my test of two separate addresses (unrelated to each other) that were both funded with only one transaction from the Binance hot wallet, I got the same results. Therefore, it appears the tool does make a bit of sense.

You probably sent coins from your address to Binance exchange, this is similar result that I got with random address I was testing there was 25% ofac sanctions blacklist connected with Binance.
Their main hot wallet have similar results with Antinalysis website.

[o_e_l_e_o]

Just imagine rouge employee of chainalysis manually flagging any address he wants, or making some unintentional mistake that could ruin lives.

Wouldn't surprise me in the slightest. Given that we know centralized exchanges, which are heavily regulated, do everything from accepting bribes to list shitcoins, insider trade, illegally sell your data, and more, then it is entirely reasonable to suspect that blockchain analysis companies which are barely regulated at all accept bribes/money/favors to magically erase the taint on some coins. Or maybe the US government pay to have the coins of various Russia oligarchs tainted. Or maybe you've said some anti-government things online - nothing illegal, but suddenly you find your wallets on a blacklist somewhere. What a coincidence!