"Invisible Wallet" Addresses / Client Behavior

[nhodges]

Does bitcoind behave the same way as the client and generate change addresses? I am trying to send a transaction in a way that the recipient can verify it is coming from my wallet address without having "changed hands" in the interim. (I want to be able to see the recipient proper from just looking at the transaction details on Block Explorer, without having to go "one level deeper" so to speak.)

[1715348891]

1715348891

[1715348891]

1715348891

[1715348891]

1715348891

[1715348891]

1715348891

[tlhonmey]

Yes.  Bitcoind operates the same way.  It's the same program, but with only a CLI interface instead of both the CLI and the GUI.  Your best bet for doing what you're trying to do is probably to create a new wallet and transfer the required amount to a single address in it.  Then, when you send it on to the recipient, that single address will be the only possible source and all of the coins will come from it.


The simpler solution for the problem would be for the recipient to generate a new address and pass it to you and only you through a secure channel.  Then any coins showing up at that address almost certainly came from you, with a probability of exception so low as to not be worth calculating.

If neither of those solutions will work, then I'll need more details about just what you're trying to do.

[grue]

1. use blockexplorer and find where the coins were sent from
2. use signmesage rpc/cli command to sign a string like "I'm nhodges!!!"
3. receiver can verify the message using verifymesage

[Garr255]

1. use blockexplorer and find where the coins were sent from
2. use signmesage rpc/cli command to sign a string like "I'm nhodges!!!"
3. receiver can verify the message using verifymesage

Thanks for that bit of info