Bitcoin Is Transparent, But Should Its Users Be?

[dzungmobile]

You're not wrong with it being private depends on the user doing privacy technique and so on when using Bitcoin and despite all that, the transaction is still recorded forever.

Privacy basically needs to be secure at beginning, then maintained after that and with privacy, it's similar to security, if you leak your identity somewhere, somehow, and anytime, you will lose your privacy forever.

It's unrealistic to require everyone to know well about importance of privacy as well as how to achieve and maintain it but whenever people can start to do better for their privacy practically they will need to do that immediately.

Develop a non-KYC stash.
Can you really disappear from the internet? Jameson Lopp came close.

[Bryan jessy]

Regardless of how transparent Bitcoin is the user needs privacy, others are not supposed to known that a fellow being has Bitcoin in store, from the beginning privacy is the first thing that should be considered,  because if a person is not private enough with his information or if  he fails to secure his details well he will have issues with his assets because it will make it easy for people to breakthrough his account, this is why most people have lost their Bitcoin because the feel is transparent and not much stress is required, but that should not be the case so far it is something that can attract others eyes it is very mandatory to stay security tight and trust me hacking into that account will never be possible.

[Die_empty]

Though it does not change the fact that Bitcoin's blockchain is a permanent, public ledger (as it cannot hide users’ transaction graphs), what do y’all think would be its long-term impact on Bitcoin privacy? Does it have the potential to become a major infrastructure in this regard?

You stated that Bitcoin is not anonymous, which means we have a responsibility to make make our transactions private. A single exposure of your personal details on any centralized exchange can simply lead to the tracing of your financial records on the blockchain. The blockchain is already in use in different sectors for record-keeping, such as finance, digital payments, smart contracts, supply chain, and many more. Bitcoin's public ledger is already an independent major infrastructure globally, as it offers a censorship-resistant and neutral financial system.

[Lexandroove]

You're not wrong with it being private depends on the user doing privacy technique and so on when using Bitcoin and despite all that, the transaction is still recorded forever.

I think not too long ago there was topic about bitcoin shielded transaction that more or less use zk proof and the funds represented as encrypted notes, instead of full privacy like XMR it's going to be Zcash style privacy.

But, this method seems to have disadvantage of relying on centralized indexer.

For now if you want privacy you'll need to use decentralized on ramp through p2p like bisq that doesn't link your address to centralized exchange that points to your KYC.

The permanence of Bitcoin's public ledger is precisely why privacy remains a challenge, even when users take precautions.

Shielded transactions using zkps could offer an interesting middle ground, but introducing dependencies like centralized indexers raises new questions about trust and decentralisation, if you ask me.

In an ideal world, Bitcoin should make financial privacy more accessible without compromising its permissionless nature.

[slaman29]

<>
Didn't they already spend billions on something like this before? Or was that some private blockchain.

Referring to a previous government investment in blockchain privacy infrastructure, or the development of Tor itself?

They're quite different, Tor is an independent privacy network that helps obscure users’ IP addresses; it doesn't make Bitcoin’s public transaction history private.

Ya I know what Tor is lol.

Was talking about PH government investment in blockchain, it was supposed to be for citizen records, or something like that. This was years ago but on Google I can't find it (that's problem with Google, the 2026 government investment is all they can find and you have to really dig for specific years to find a result). Many countries did the same but to me it was all pointless because it was all private blockchain. People didn't understand that transparency is useless without immutability.

Didn't they already spend billions on something like this before? Or was that some private blockchain.

I totally forget if they didnt if they did Im sure they wont spend it all as these people always slandered budget funds from the Government. But they did spend on the potential of a chain it wasnt that popular but they plan to use that to implement their plan Law that uses blockchain to handle government contracts expenditure. Just forget whats the name of the chain or what network they will cater but its not bitcoin since they are using a smart contract.

Yeah whatever it was it was for sure some corporate chain. This is what I hate about all these Asian government, they totally ignore the need for public infrastructure.

[X-ray]

The permanence of Bitcoin's public ledger is precisely why privacy remains a challenge, even when users take precautions.

Shielded transactions using zkps could offer an interesting middle ground, but introducing dependencies like centralized indexers raises new questions about trust and decentralisation, if you ask me.

In an ideal world, Bitcoin should make financial privacy more accessible without compromising its permissionless nature.

Yeah that's the difficult part, but I think if you really need privacy that much Monero is what you should use, speaking about fact all decentralized blockchain have permanent immutable public ledger, the only distinguishing part is some decide to hide theirs like Monero.

I personally think Bitcoin is already perfect, stemming from the past scrutiny especially from someone like Elizabeth Warren and others who are calling Bitcoin a tool for cybercrime which is very misleading despite the blockchain being completely transparent.

Imagine if Bitcoin have built-in shielded transaction with absolute privacy, I doubt it could get this far.

[cryptoaddictchie]

Yeah whatever it was it was for sure some corporate chain. This is what I hate about all these Asian government, they totally ignore the need for public infrastructure.

I didnt follow the news about it but based on my research its called BayaniChain which will be use polygon network. As far as I know this chain is almost as dead water now. I mean not commonly used well theres an advantage since it will not be congested as they are not a prime L1 now.

Though the progress about this isnt going anywhere since no more news about it since then. You also from Asia country?

[SamReomo]

Because Bitcoin transactions are pseudonymous, not fully anonymous, they require a critical layer of privacy, where tools like Tor obscure user IP addresses, making it much harder for observers to link transaction activity to real-world identities.

Some people like to use Bitcoin the way it is they don't really care a lot about privacy. However, those who are into privacy know well that at one point it makes full sense to have highest privacy in cryptocurrency world to be safe from others who can be harmful. For the privacy one has to first learn about personal wallets and about the ways one can make the coins fully private.

Such knowledge is available to everyone these days, the ones who love privacy use such knowledge in good ways while the negative actors use it to steal coins of others. For high privacy one has to make his own personal wallet especially a cold wallet on a air gapped system and buy Bitcoin from any reputed no KYC autonomous exchange using Tor. That is more than enough for a normal day to day user who wants privacy but those who want even deeper privacy should use the top level privacy enhancing services.

[Lexandroove]

Because Bitcoin transactions are pseudonymous, not fully anonymous, they require a critical layer of privacy, where tools like Tor obscure user IP addresses, making it much harder for observers to link transaction activity to real-world identities.

Some people like to use Bitcoin the way it is they don't really care a lot about privacy. However, those who are into privacy know well that at one point it makes full sense to have highest privacy in cryptocurrency world to be safe from others who can be harmful. For the privacy one has to first learn about personal wallets and about the ways one can make the coins fully private.

Such knowledge is available to everyone these days, the ones who love privacy use such knowledge in good ways while the negative actors use it to steal coins of others. For high privacy one has to make his own personal wallet especially a cold wallet on a air gapped system and buy Bitcoin from any reputed no KYC autonomous exchange using Tor. That is more than enough for a normal day to day user who wants privacy but those who want even deeper privacy should use the top level privacy enhancing services.

Privacy matters, particularly for those who don’t want their financial activities exposed to strangers or potentially harmful actors

A cold wallet and a no-KYC exchange don't automatically make Bitcoin transactions fully private, though, as on-chain activity remains traceable, while privacy also depends on how coins are acquired, moved, and used.

The goal should be to make financial privacy accessible to ordinary users without requiring everyone to become a privacy expert, which makes the emergence of infrastructures such as Babylon Labs’ Trustless Vaults really promising for the future of true ownership of Bitcoin.

[Ojima-ojo]

Banks datas can get deleted or banks liquidations with all data transactions history and everything, but Bitcoin transactions remain at the time stamp on the blockchain forever, this is the most interesting aspect and part of the blockchain that make it the highest data storage netwoyin the world and the mechanism that cryptography and other data Chains run with on blockchain.


What you pointing as a disadvantage because of the availability of transactions data online and accessible to all is what make blockchain transactions most unique and open source even though the wallet holder have and control the full right of the money and where he intend to move them to.

[Somegory]

Everything has it's lane in this Blockchain space and that's why I love it, you can choose to go privacy or KYC'd if that's what you want, it's all about choices for everyone and each of them has their consequences and also advantages.

Bitcoin users are different, some cares about decentralisation and others don't care, it's why they store Bitcoin on exchanges, they gave their control over to centralised platfroms, something Bitcoin was built to fight.

Yet we can't say they aren't Bitcoin users, holders or investors, they are one of us anyways, I've stopped trying to talk people out of it because it's a total waste of time, everyone has a choice to make in this Blockchain space.

[ruykeri]

For bitcoin privacy if anyone use a wallet or hardware wallet to transact, you will not be able to understand from which person the bitcoin is actually going to through the blockchain address alone. But the problem is suppose you are using a platform where your identity is given. In that case if you connect the wallet to your account on that platform then your identity will be revealed. Or if your identity is not given, then it may be possible to find your identity through IP address tracking. And here, basically using Tor Browser can be beneficial. So, I think Tor should not be considered a complete solution to hide bitcoin transactions. It basically protects the privacy of the network, but if someone does not want to reveal the bitcoin transactions themselves then no one will be able to understand which person is actually holding or selling bitcoin.

[r_victory]

Privacy can be breached if necessary. I see this "protection" of user privacy as similar to bank secrecy, for example, although it's not so easy to break. Bitcoin doesn't guarantee anonymity, and I believe that privacy is more in the hands of the user than the "ecosystem" itself.

[Chinesebaby]

Though it does not change the fact that Bitcoin's blockchain is a permanent, public ledger (as it cannot hide users’ transaction graphs), what do y’all think would be its long-term impact on Bitcoin privacy? Does it have the potential to become a major infrastructure in this regard?

For the fact that Bitcoin is a decentralized digital asset and also transparent, whereby it's transaction can be viewed and traced on the Bitcoin blockchain doesn't automatically implies that Bitcoin users also need to be transparent whereby each transactions can be traced to a particular individual. Because I think thats what you implies by using the phrase "transparency" in this context. Because when issues regarding the transparency of Bitcoin is been discussed, the lifestyle and step of its creator Satoshi Nakamoto should always be one factor that guides our approach to Bitcoin investing. But due to the increase in crypto theft and government have made KYC compulsory, it still doesn't mean we should now opening start exposing our identity to random individuals, for our own safety.

[Agathamay]

I don't see the government accepting to use bitcoin for their transactions and yes they can buy it for their reserve but running their government with system that very transparent like bitcoin which can be verified by anyone on the blockchain wouldn't be an easy one for them but if it ever happens then the economy will be a very thriving one because it will reduce the rate of government embezzlement and misappropriation of funds as everything will be transparent and verifiable.

[Luzin]

For the fact that Bitcoin is a decentralized digital asset and also transparent, whereby it's transaction can be viewed and traced on the Bitcoin blockchain doesn't automatically implies that Bitcoin users also need to be transparent whereby each transactions can be traced to a particular individual. Because I think thats what you implies by using the phrase "transparency" in this context. Because when issues regarding the transparency of Bitcoin is been discussed, the lifestyle and step of its creator Satoshi Nakamoto should always be one factor that guides our approach to Bitcoin investing. But due to the increase in crypto theft and government have made KYC compulsory, it still doesn't mean we should now opening start exposing our identity to random individuals, for our own safety.

Satoshi never asked for KYC. But the progress of the industry forces us to provide KYC. Apart from the fact that regulations make this condition a main requirement in some regions. The initial goal is good, but sometimes KYC ends up causing us significant losses if our identity leaks and is used for crimes. There should be security guarantees given to us in case of data leaks that could harm us. Currently, we are still able to avoid it because there are some regions that do not require it.

So actually we are happy to remain anonymous, but regulations do not support that yet. Remember that we can be anonymous when transacting with BTC, but once it involves fiat money, we cannot avoid it. We will definitely be asked for identity requirements. Currently, if we deal with countries, transparent identity will be a main requirement. But remember the government regulations require that, yet they have never even been responsible for that identity. Even from that identity, new problems will arise, which have happened many times. So in the end, it harms us.

[348Judah]

Bitcoin is made transparent so that everything will appear for public view and despite this, it does not permit for any form of manipulation because you can alter anything that is being distributed on the open Ledger of blockchain, however we can still go with the implementation of the layer 2 protocol by going private, everyone that knows how to go about what you wanted with bitcoin wallet definitely consider privacy at the same time.

[BABY SHOES]

You're not wrong with it being private depends on the user doing privacy technique and so on when using Bitcoin and despite all that, the transaction is still recorded forever.

Blockchain is public, all transactions will obviously be recorded forever, to be Privacy enough do not need to show off wealth assets... you are in privacy mode, people can find our transactions on the blockchain so it won't be that easy.

Your wallet will not be labeled with your real name.

For now if you want privacy you'll need to use decentralized on ramp through p2p like bisq that doesn't link your address to centralized exchange that points to your KYC.

Yeah... P2P transactions are good, but you should know that the volume of liquidity is low, unlike on exchanges you can trade easily with high liquidity... It comes back to your own choice.

[CryptopreneurBrainboss]

Though it does not change the fact that Bitcoin's blockchain is a permanent, public ledger (as it cannot hide users’ transaction graphs), what do y’all think would be its long-term impact on Bitcoin privacy? Does it have the potential to become a major infrastructure in this regard?

The  transparency of Bitcoin wasn't so users can be monitored, kyced or restricted from having their freedom as the core beliefs of Bitcoin is being in control but the transparency was implemented for trust to be established in transactions and that enhanced better decentralized transactions as you don't have to just believe a transaction has been executed but you can monitor it in real time on the Blockchain. Bitcoin wasn't intended to be linked to your Identity that's why you have addresses that replaced real identity and that's how Bitcoin was intended to be used. Bitcoin users don't have to reveal their identity as you can be excluded from the transparency that Bitcoin portray to hide your identity since the Blockchain can be used to do all the verification needed to know a transaction has been made unlike the fiat system that banks are using that is centralized and not opened to the public.

[MusaMohamed]

Bitcoin wasn't intended to be linked to your Identity that's why you have addresses that replaced real identity and that's how Bitcoin was intended to be used. Bitcoin users don't have to reveal their identity as you can be excluded from the transparency that Bitcoin portray to hide your identity since the Blockchain can be used to do all the verification needed to know a transaction has been made unlike the fiat system that banks are using that is centralized and not opened to the public.

If users don't link their identity with Bitcoin addresses by showing off on social media, in real life, or through KYC documents submitted to online platforms, they will not lose their privacy and nobody know that how many Bitcoin addresses and bitcoin they have.

Like with on chain analysis, these companies only can identify Bitcoin addresses, and how much bitcoins stored in those addresses. They can not know who are owners of these addresses and bitcoins if they can not collect any identity documents somewhere else.

Like charts in a group of Address Balance Charts.
https://www.lookintobitcoin.com/charts/