Should i change my BTC Wallet Address ?

[BitcoinsGreat]

I was in the Si*b^^ Signatue campiagn and i am using the same address currently that i used in that Signature campaign. As you have heard binance asked for verification if they receive the funds directly to the binance account.

I receive my funds in the electrum wallet, If i transfer my funds from my wallet to binance, will it be a probelm?

Can i continue using the same BTC address, as it was an Electrum address and not directly a binance deposit address 

[1714681997]

1714681997

[1714681997]

1714681997

[1714681997]

1714681997

[Findingnemo]

AFAIK, Sinbad's signature campaign escrow address has been added in the blacklist so any addresses come in contact with may have a problem maybe not now but in a month or even after six months your exchange freeze account if you deposited even once to the exchange's address from your address which used to receive any funds from flagged address.

Can i continue using the same BTC address, as it was an Electrum address and not directly a binance deposit address 

Exchanges and casinos always stay vigilant to prevent money launderers from abusing the platforms so even if you swap to 10 different addresses before you deposit funds to your Binance account, they know it.

Change your address ASAP.

[OmegaStarScream]

I'm not sure that would necessarily help though? I'm not an expert on KYT (Know your transaction) but from my understanding of things, even changing the address, may not help? otherwise, how come they could detect malicious activities if that's really all they do, just check the direct transactions?

[BitcoinsGreat]

I'm not sure that would necessarily help though? I'm not an expert on KYT (Know your transaction) but from my understanding of things, even changing the address, may not help? otherwise, how come they could detect malicious activities if that's really all they do, just check the direct transactions?

So you mean to say that even i change the address for future transcations, my previous address is linked to the Si^d^^ black listed address and even if i transfer the btc to few new addresses and then to binance, it can still be a probelm.

So if i wanted to use my balance on that address, i would need to mix it with a mixer so that my connection with Si#D$$ is lost ?

[Charles-Tim]

So you mean to say that even i change the address for future transcations, my previous address is linked to the Si^d^^ black listed address and even if i transfer the btc to few new addresses and then to binance, it can still be a probelm.

It is easy to trace the blacklisted address to your own address. Even if you change the address now, it does not matter at all. But I think if you do not use your address to receive funds from the blacklisted address directly, you have no problem. But if you are not having fund on Binance, I will advise you not to use the exchange for now.

[apogio]

So if i wanted to use my balance on that address, i would need to mix it with a mixer so that my connection with Si#D$$ is lost ?

Or with coinjoins. You could use whirlpool for example.

To be honest, personally I would:
1. create a wallet specifically for this mixing service's payments.
2. start doing whirlpool coinjoins and let them go to the wallet created on step (1).
3. avoid sending any other transactions to this wallet (any of the addresses of this wallet).
4. if you need to send out of this wallet, just do it from the fresh coinjoined UTXOs.

In my opinion, you will be able to use the UTXOs anyway in the future. However, if everything has gone wrong and all the miners decide to reject these inputs, you want to have them as separate UTXOs. Don't mix them with other ones you may have.

[shield132]

I was in the Si*b^^ Signatue campiagn and i am using the same address currently that i used in that Signature campaign. As you have heard binance asked for verification if they receive the funds directly to the binance account.

I receive my funds in the electrum wallet, If i transfer my funds from my wallet to binance, will it be a probelm?

Can i continue using the same BTC address, as it was an Electrum address and not directly a binance deposit address 

Don't send your Sinbad campaign earnings directly to Binance's Bitcoin address or you'll be in trouble like other users. I think it's better for you to coinjoin (not via Wasabi) or mix your coins to get new coins without Sinbad traces. Then deposit them on decentralized exchanger and exchange them for altcoins like LTC and then deposit LTC to Binance.
For new transactions, use a brand new address that won't be linked to your Sinbad wallet.

[virasog]

I receive my funds in the electrum wallet, If i transfer my funds from my wallet to binance, will it be a probelm?

Can i continue using the same BTC address, as it was an Electrum address and not directly a binance deposit address  

To be honest, i don't think it is a problem anymore and even Binance unfreezes the account if you tell / convivence them that you receive them from Signature Campaign.

You must have heard the term, "“Better safe than sorry”', so why not take the precautionary steps to avoid any mishap in the future. I would not take much to create a new wallet and asking your campaign manager to change you receiving payment address. Keep the old fund the same wallet and not mix them with your new wallet (by transferring them). Rather try to exchange them via direct exchangers or coinjoin (as many others recommend this too).

[_act_]

Or with coinjoins. You could use whirlpool for example.

Why not just swap it to monero and back to bitcoin? He is using a a centralized exchange. There is possibility that the exchange may still also seize coinjoin coins.

If I am the one, I will send the fund to two addresses, wait for some days, send it to another two addresses which makes it two hops and I will leave it for some days before sending it to an exchange to spend.

But I do not think OP has any problem, because Binance ought to have seized his coin or freeze his account but there is nothing done.

[apogio]

Why not just swap it to monero and back to bitcoin? He is using a a centralized exchange. There is possibility that the exchange may still also seize coinjoin coins.

Yes, I am in favour of this method. I use it a lot in general.

In fact, there is nothing wrong with also keeping these funds in XMR and use XMR, because I don't consider XMR a s**coin but a proper altcoin, but this is on OP to decide. Then OP could have a clear distinction in his head that any new Bitcoin UTXO isn't linked with the previous UTXOs that come from the mixing service.

The only catch is that should OP wish to get back to Bitcoin using a reverse swap from XMR, there is no way to know where the new BTC utxos come from. So, in case those utxos come from the same mixing service, he will not have gained anything. However, there is no way to know if any UTXO you receive, from now on, is linked to the mixing service we talk about.

This is why I suggested coinjoins. I support coinjoins is general, no matter where the inputs come from. Bitcoin is money and as long as it is used widely, you will eventually receive money coming from illicit activities, just like the FIAT money you receive every day. We should learn to use coinjoins as a habit. It is not mandatory, but it is clearly a good option!

[rat03gopoh]

I receive my funds in the electrum wallet, If i transfer my funds from my wallet to binance, will it be a probelm?

I think not, but can't be sure that your account is not on their watchlist if you will always receive from the same address. I agree with some of the opinions above that it is time for you to get a new address for future payments. They may turn out to be difficult for you at any time.

[Pmalek]

You shouldn't be using the same address for different campaign and purposes. Create separate wallets (not addresses) for any activity that you do. That way it's easier to monitor and control the different coins. You don't want to end up in a situation to link a Sinbad UTXO with a KYC-verified coin and effectively prove that you are connected to both. Leave the Sinbad coins alone for now. When the fees drop, they'll need to be anonymized, and you better keep them away from centralized exchanges.

[BitcoinsGreat]

You shouldn't be using the same address for different campaign and purposes. Create separate wallets (not addresses) for any activity that you do. That way it's easier to monitor and control the different coins. You don't want to end up in a situation to link a Sinbad UTXO with a KYC-verified coin and effectively prove that you are connected to both. Leave the Sinbad coins alone for now. When the fees drop, they'll need to be anonymized, and you better keep them away from centralized exchanges.

Thanks for this and other advices by the members here.

I also want to know one more thing. I have been using this address for some years now, so i got some money from Si^D^^ recently but what about those satoshis which i got when i was not in that campaign ? I transferred some satoshi to some other wallets before the campaign too. So all those wallets become suspected 

[hugeblack]

For your privacy and to enhance your privacy, you must use a new Bitcoin address for each signature campaign you join, while using a wallet that supports coin control feature.

Currently, sinbad address is on OFAC blacklist list, and some central services may freeze any deposits from your address and ask you for documents to prove the source of the funds, so you must break the link. Some CEXs do not conduct a deep analysis of the chain, so sending funds from that account to 5 new addresses^* may be enough. But to ensure that no problems occur, and given the high transaction fees, it is better to use any service that breaks the link between your addresses, such as mixers, for example.

* Your address ---> new address ---> new address ---> new address ---> new address ---> exchange address

[Pmalek]

I also want to know one more thing. I have been using this address for some years now, so i got some money from Si^D^^ recently but what about those satoshis which i got when i was not in that campaign ? I transferred some satoshi to some other wallets before the campaign too. So all those wallets become suspected 

It doesn't cost you any money to generate a fresh address every time you need to receive Bitcoin, nor will you be saving on transaction fees by using the same one over and over again. Start doing that so it becomes a habit and also divide your activities in different wallets. Then, things like what you just explained won't happen.

You said that you used that same address several years. Have you received any coins to it from a service that has your KYC details? For example, an exchange, a casino, etc.? If you have, it would be very easy for blockchain analysis or any interested 3rd-party to figure out who you are based on what that centralized service tells them. You moving the older coins before you started receiving Sinbad payments doesn't matter. Bitcoin's blockchain is public. The same person that owns coins from a CEX also received BTC from Sinbad. That's what the blockchain will show. 

[ranochigo]

This is why I suggested coinjoins. I support coinjoins is general, no matter where the inputs come from. Bitcoin is money and as long as it is used widely, you will eventually receive money coming from illicit activities, just like the FIAT money you receive every day. We should learn to use coinjoins as a habit. It is not mandatory, but it is clearly a good option!

Whilst CoinJoins are a good and easy way of obfuscating the origin of your funds, by the means of mixing them with other UTXOs, it is still frowned upon by many exchange. They seem to associate CoinJoin with criminal activities, and hence it's likely that it becomes an issue regardless. Privacy coins negates this issue because they are designed what that in mind, and in comparison would be much more fungible.

I think the best method would be to have a form of plausible deniability. You have to convince the exchange that you're likely not the owner of the address that received the Sinbad tainted coins, and thus you should do multiple hops, like what hugeblack has said. The number of hops that is done matters less, but your spending pattern (ie. how it gets sent to the final address) would matter a lot more. For example, if you simply send the coins from one address into another, in a single transaction, it would be worse than splitting them and sending them to different addresses.

[LoyceV]

I have been using this address for some years now

But why? You're using Electrum, which gives you a very long list of new addresses. You can label each of them, to keep track of different payments. Address reuse is bad for privacy, and makes it harder to know where a payment came from. Why would you ever use the same address for different purposes?

* Your address ---> new address ---> new address ---> new address ---> new address ---> exchange address

I don't think that matters for chain analysis, unless funds are joined with other inputs to create multiple outputs. And at the moment it costs a small fortune in transaction fees.

I think the best method would be to have a form of plausible deniability.

They'll ask the next question: "How did you get the funds?". Plausible deniability isn't the same as a plausible answer.

[apogio]

I have been using this address for some years now, so i got some money from Si^D^^ recently but what about those satoshis which i got when i was not in that campaign ? I transferred some satoshi to some other wallets before the campaign too. So all those wallets become suspected 

Yes, if you have received coins to the same address, then it is obvious that you are the owner of the address. If you gave me the address A to send you money there and you also gave it to another user, then all that money is now blended together and if someone tracked my transactions, they would also see the other user's payments on that address.

Having seen that, I strongly recommend using the swap method that I explained above.

[satscraper]

I was in the Si*b^^ Signatue campiagn and i am using the same address currently that i used in that Signature campaign. As you have heard binance asked for verification if they receive the funds directly to the binance account.

I receive my funds in the electrum wallet, If i transfer my funds from my wallet to binance, will it be a probelm?

Can i continue using the same BTC address, as it was an Electrum address and not directly a binance deposit address  

You can obfuscate a bit the source of your income   before directing it to binance. The easiest way to do this is to make the provisional transaction (to  fresh addresses under  your control) which  mimics the ordinary  2 x 2 packet transaction. By doing so, you will introduce a 50% ambiguity into the analysis of funds originating from the signature campaign. You can do it manually (virtually with the use of any wallet) or automatically through the fake conjoin feature implemented in Sparrow.  

[Pmalek]

But why? You're using Electrum, which gives you a very long list of new addresses. You can label each of them, to keep track of different payments. Address reuse is bad for privacy, and makes it harder to know where a payment came from. Why would you ever use the same address for different purposes?

Perhaps he thought that keeping all his bitcoin in the same address would result in cheaper transaction fees in the future, not knowing that the number of inputs, outputs, and the script type determines the total transaction size and fees and not how many different addresses you have.

* Your address ---> new address ---> new address ---> new address ---> new address ---> exchange address

I don't think that matters for chain analysis, unless funds are joined with other inputs to create multiple outputs. And at the moment it costs a small fortune in transaction fees.

You shouldn't send the entire balance from address A to B, C, etc., But if you send only one part, blockchain analysis can't possibly know it's the same person. The coins might have changed hands 2-3 times already. If the question arises where did you get your coins from, I bought them P2P in cash from a tourist who visited my city.