Wallets supporting Silent Payments

[dkbit98]

It's now official, BitBox02 just added support for Silent Payments, and this is now the first Hardware Wallet that can send Silent Payments.
This is a step in a right direction but note that receiving Silent Payments is not available yet with BitBox wallet.
I am hoping other hardware wallets will soon follow this example.

BitBox made a blog post explaining how Silent Payments work:
https://bitbox.swiss/blog/understanding-silent-payments-part-one/

List is updated:

• Cake Wallet ^beta
• Silentium wallet ^{web experimental}
• SeedSigner ^test
• Blue Wallet ^{sending only}
• BitBox02 Hardware Wallet ^{sending only}

[satscraper]

It's now official, BitBox02 just added support for Silent Payments,

Did they receive  bounty opened for  implementation of sending to silent payment address?  BitBox is among those wallets which may apply for 0.01 BTC ^{(not a big sum but still money).}.  Worthy to note that still only two other hardware wallets (namely  Passport and SeedSighner) are among hardware wallets which may apply for such bounty. The door has been shut on the rest of HW  I wonder why?

[bitmover]

Maybe it can improve privacy for signature campaigns, depending on how the campaign manager publishes results. Or for sure it would be a privacy improvement if it replaces the address posted in Bitcointalk profiles.

I would really love such feature.
Creating a new address,  labeling it,  taking care of inputs etc is complicated if you are worried about privacy.

Basically every week I need to  give an address to some campaign or giveaway contest etc...

Adding Silent payments to our profiles would require an adoption from campagin managers as well, but it would change things more radically than segwit adoption.

[LoyceV]

Creating a new address,  labeling it,  taking care of inputs etc is complicated if you are worried about privacy.

Basically every week I need to  give an address to some campaign or giveaway contest etc...

If you'd use the same Silent address for different things, you wouldn't know who paid you. And if you combine inputs, the sender still finds out which other addresses belong to you.

[Pmalek]

Adding Silent payments to our profiles would require an adoption from campagin managers as well, but it would change things more radically than segwit adoption.

I am sure that campaign managers would quickly get on board. They were supportive of segwit as well when it came out and started becoming popular. Besides, they don't lose anything if they support silent payments. But we will surely have to wait some time before we get to the point where the most commonly used wallets support this BIP. When that time comes, silent payments should become a normal thing.

LoyceV does have a point, though, in that you will have to know all the places where you posted your unique silent payment address, and if you are using the same one everywhere, you won't be able to keep track of who paid you and for what. Unless, you know what amounts come from where.

[LoyceV]

you will have to know all the places where you posted your unique silent payment address

That in itself is a privacy problem: you'll link your presence on different sites together. Easy fix is of course to use different Silent addresses. To be, labeling isn't a problem. I like it.

[BlackHatCoiner]

I am sure that campaign managers would quickly get on board. They were supportive of segwit as well when it came out and started becoming popular.

I wouldn't be so sure. There was a big incentive to switch to Segwit, because it is much cheaper for large sized transactions, especially when made on a regular basis. However, this one is a different case. More complex and will be treated as unnecessary addition for a lot of wallet software (compared to Segwit). I can agree, though, that it would help in signature campaigns, even if it's not a holy grail if used in general.

[dkbit98]

Did they receive  bounty opened for  implementation of sending to silent payment address?  BitBox is among those wallets which may apply for 0.01 BTC ^{(not a big sum but still money).}.  Worthy to note that still only two other hardware wallets (namely  Passport and SeedSighner) are among hardware wallets which may apply for such bounty. The door has been shut on the rest of HW  I wonder why?

I have no idea about that, but someone should create a bounty for receiving Silent Payments in hardware wallets, that seems to be more complicated thing to do.

Adding Silent payments to our profiles would require an adoption from campagin managers as well, but it would change things more radically than segwit adoption.

I would support this.
We just need more wallets getting full support and we need someone from nanagers to break the ice.

If you'd use the same Silent address for different things, you wouldn't know who paid you. And if you combine inputs, the sender still finds out which other addresses belong to you.

Event with Silent Payments you still need to have good management for your addresses, so you don't have to join all your addresses into one.
I think we still need to have additional tool to get more privacy means second layer solution, mixing, coinjoin or joinstr.

[Floxynice]

I am sure that campaign managers would quickly get on board. They were supportive of segwit as well when it came out and started becoming popular.

I wouldn't be so sure. There was a big incentive to switch to Segwit, because it is much cheaper for large sized transactions, especially when made on a regular basis. However, this one is a different case. More complex and will be treated as unnecessary addition for a lot of wallet software (compared to Segwit). I can agree, though, that it would help in signature campaigns, even if it's not a holy grail if used in general.

Signature campaign managers might even make a rule against it because it might help the signature participants to cheat a campaign without the public noticing.
Silent payment is not very necessary here in the forum, it will be more beneficial to businesses men who accepts bitcoin. This technology will help them avoid the public tracking back to their address when they reuse it, vice versa.
Also individuals who give out their bitcoin addresses on social media for donations will like the silent payment because it will prevent people linking their bitcoin address to their real life identity.

[Pmalek]

it will be more beneficial to businesses men who accepts bitcoin. This technology will help them avoid the public tracking back to their address when they reuse it, vice versa.
Also individuals who give out their bitcoin addresses on social media for donations will like the silent payment because it will prevent people linking their bitcoin address to their real life identity.

Think about it for a moment. People might not be able to track how much bitcoin a businessman has received, but they will still know that they are accepting BTC. If you are on social media and accepting donations, you are probably registered with your real name. I would never donate to an anonymous individual over social media if I don't know who it is and there is no way to prove that the money would be put to good use. I am sure many think like me. And again, you can connect bitcoin to a real person who accepts it with their posting of their silent payment address. What you don't know are the amounts they have received.