bitcoinrocks (OP)
Legendary
 Offline
Activity: 1372
Merit: 1000
|
 |
May 17, 2014, 07:54:28 PM |
|
I read something about Electrum that I didn't like. Something about it being centralized in some way?
What do you mean it is "centralized"? It does rely on specific servers, since it does not download the entire blockchain. Yep, that's what I mean. From what I understand, multibit also does not download the entire blockchain and is able to function without relying on centralized servers. Is it possible to have the best of both worlds? Meaning security/privacy through changing addresses, backing up only one private key or seed, and not relying on somebody's servers? |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
There are several different types of Bitcoin clients. The most secure are full nodes like Bitcoin Core, which will follow the rules of the network no matter what miners do. Even if every miner decided to create 1000 bitcoins per block, full nodes would stick to the rules and reject those blocks.
|
|
|
Advertised sites are not endorsed by the Bitcoin Forum. They may be unsafe, untrustworthy, or illegal in your jurisdiction.
|
|
byt411
|
|
May 17, 2014, 07:59:25 PM |
|
I read something about Electrum that I didn't like. Something about it being centralized in some way?
What do you mean it is "centralized"? It does rely on specific servers, since it does not download the entire blockchain. Yep, that's what I mean. From what I understand, multibit also does not download the entire blockchain and is able to function without relying on centralized servers. Is it possible to have the best of both worlds? Meaning security/privacy through changing addresses, backing up only one private key or seed, and not relying on somebody's servers? That already exists... Bitcoin Core.... Multibit... They already have those features. If you consider nodes as servers, then no, that is impossible. |
|
|
|
|
alexrossi
Legendary
Offline
Activity: 3724
Merit: 1739
Join the world-leading crypto sportsbook NOW!
|
|
May 17, 2014, 08:42:56 PM |
|
Is it possible to have the best of both worlds? Meaning security/privacy through changing addresses, backing up only one private key or seed, and not relying on somebody's servers?
You can setup your own electrum server, to avoid a connection to a centralized server |
|
|
|
bitcoinrocks (OP)
Legendary
Offline
Activity: 1372
Merit: 1000
|
|
May 17, 2014, 09:21:13 PM |
|
I read something about Electrum that I didn't like. Something about it being centralized in some way?
What do you mean it is "centralized"? It does rely on specific servers, since it does not download the entire blockchain. Yep, that's what I mean. From what I understand, multibit also does not download the entire blockchain and is able to function without relying on centralized servers. Is it possible to have the best of both worlds? Meaning security/privacy through changing addresses, backing up only one private key or seed, and not relying on somebody's servers? That already exists... Bitcoin Core.... Multibit... They already have those features. If you consider nodes as servers, then no, that is impossible. I use multibit so that's great news. I just click the "New" button under the Request tab and I'm sending from a brand new address that is not easy to associate with my whole stash and I only have to back up the one private key? It sounds too good to be true. Nodes are OK. Have to connect to the network somehow. |
|
|
|
|
|
byt411
|
|
May 17, 2014, 09:27:57 PM |
|
I read something about Electrum that I didn't like. Something about it being centralized in some way?
What do you mean it is "centralized"? It does rely on specific servers, since it does not download the entire blockchain. Yep, that's what I mean. From what I understand, multibit also does not download the entire blockchain and is able to function without relying on centralized servers. Is it possible to have the best of both worlds? Meaning security/privacy through changing addresses, backing up only one private key or seed, and not relying on somebody's servers? That already exists... Bitcoin Core.... Multibit... They already have those features. If you consider nodes as servers, then no, that is impossible. I use multibit so that's great news. I just click the "New" button under the Request tab and I'm sending from a brand new address that is not easy to associate with my whole stash and I only have to back up the one private key? It sounds too good to be true. Nodes are OK. Have to connect to the network somehow. Oh. You meant a single private key for more than one address. Well, that's impossible. I suppose someone could implement a seed function for Bitcoin Core, but I dunno if we desperately need that. |
|
|
|
|
bitcoinrocks (OP)
Legendary
Offline
Activity: 1372
Merit: 1000
|
|
May 17, 2014, 09:46:56 PM |
|
Is there a way to send BTC to people without making it easy for them to see my BTC balance, and also limit the number of private keys I need to back up?
|
|
|
|
|
|
byt411
|
|
May 17, 2014, 09:51:00 PM |
|
Is there a way to send BTC to people without making it easy for them to see my BTC balance, and also limit the number of private keys I need to back up?
Well, yes. You can do this: 1. Create 2 addresses, "1abc" and "1def". 2. Have the funds in 1abc. (lets say 1 BTC) 3. Send your coins to a mixing service, with forwarding addresses 1def and your recipient's address. 4. Next time you want to send a transaction, do the same but send to 1abc. This isn't as good as using new addresses every time, but the coins are still untraceable, and no one will know that 1abc and 1def are both yours. You will only need to backup 2 private keys. |
|
|
|
|
bitcoinrocks (OP)
Legendary
Offline
Activity: 1372
Merit: 1000
|
|
May 17, 2014, 09:54:12 PM |
|
Everyone that doesn't use a mixing service is exposing their total balance to the recipient whenever they send BTC?
|
|
|
|
|
|
byt411
|
|
May 17, 2014, 09:55:59 PM |
|
Everyone that doesn't use a mixing service is exposing their total balance to the recipient whenever they send BTC?
Technically yes. Change addresses can be traced, and someone can determine which addresses belong to who in that way. |
|
|
|
|
Meuh6879
Legendary
Offline
Activity: 1512
Merit: 1011
|
|
May 17, 2014, 09:58:20 PM |
|
that's why, when you bid BTC (in exchange) ... you must use already multiple wallet.
cut BTC after is useless.
when you received BTC from anonym source and use (don't linked) multiples BTC wallets ... no problem (balance unknown)
|
|
|
|
|
bitcoinrocks (OP)
Legendary
Offline
Activity: 1372
Merit: 1000
|
|
May 17, 2014, 11:02:16 PM |
|
Everyone that doesn't use a mixing service is exposing their total balance to the recipient whenever they send BTC?
Technically yes. Change addresses can be traced, and someone can determine which addresses belong to who in that way. I'm not sure what to do. There are a lot of posts in this thread saying that if you don't use multiple addresses, anyone you send BTC to will know how much BTC you have. Now it sounds like if you don't use a mixing service, everyone you send to will know what you have even if you use multiple addresses. I'm not trying to hide from anyone. I just want to go about my merry crypto life in a smart way. If I keep my entire balance in an encrypted wallet on my computer under a single address so I only have to back up that single private key, am I an idiot? Everyone I send to will know my balance, but in order to steal from me, they would have to hack into my computer and install a keylogger in order to get my password for decryption, right? |
|
|
|
|
|
byt411
|
|
May 17, 2014, 11:07:11 PM |
|
Everyone that doesn't use a mixing service is exposing their total balance to the recipient whenever they send BTC?
Technically yes. Change addresses can be traced, and someone can determine which addresses belong to who in that way. I'm not sure what to do. There are a lot of posts in this thread saying that if you don't use multiple addresses, anyone you send BTC to will know how much BTC you have. Now it sounds like if you don't use a mixing service, everyone you send to will know what you have even if you use multiple addresses. I'm not trying to hide from anyone. I just want to go about my merry crypto life in a smart way. If I keep my entire balance in an encrypted wallet on my computer under a single address so I only have to back up that single private key, am I an idiot? Everyone I send to will know my balance, but in order to steal from me, they would have to hack into my computer and install a keylogger in order to get my password for decryption, right? No, you are not an idiot. And yes, to steal from you, they would have to hack into your wallet. People that want to stay anonymous are either criminals or privacy-paranoid. |
|
|
|
|
bitcoinrocks (OP)
Legendary
Offline
Activity: 1372
Merit: 1000
|
|
May 17, 2014, 11:14:39 PM |
|
It sounds like everyone is going to know my balance if I don't use a mixing service and that's OK. The important thing is that they can't take it. What is the best way to go about storing the bulk of my BTC offline? Paper wallets seem to be popular. How do you transfer BTC from a paper wallet to an online wallet for spending?
|
|
|
|
|
|
byt411
|
|
May 17, 2014, 11:22:16 PM |
|
It sounds like everyone is going to know my balance if I don't use a mixing service and that's OK. The important thing is that they can't take it. What is the best way to go about storing the bulk of my BTC offline? Paper wallets seem to be popular. How do you transfer BTC from a paper wallet to an online wallet for spending?
You can use any wallet to import the private key, and you can spend funds from that wallet. |
|
|
|
|
bitcoinrocks (OP)
Legendary
Offline
Activity: 1372
Merit: 1000
|
|
May 18, 2014, 01:13:55 AM |
|
It sounds like everyone is going to know my balance if I don't use a mixing service and that's OK. The important thing is that they can't take it. What is the best way to go about storing the bulk of my BTC offline? Paper wallets seem to be popular. How do you transfer BTC from a paper wallet to an online wallet for spending?
You can use any wallet to import the private key, and you can spend funds from that wallet. So you create a new private key on your computer, print it onto a piece of paper, and delete it from your computer. Then when you want to spend those funds, you type the private key from the piece of paper into your computer? I don't see how that offers much extra security since your private key will then be known if your computer has been compromised. What am I missing? |
|
|
|
|
btcxyzzz
Legendary
Offline
Activity: 888
Merit: 1000
Monero - secure, private and untraceable currency.
|
|
May 18, 2014, 01:33:52 AM |
|
realised, and because of high volatility, it's safest to open accounts on like 10 exchanges and keep coins/dollars there...
|
|
|
|
|
Light
|
|
May 18, 2014, 01:55:10 AM |
|
What is the best way to go about storing the bulk of my BTC offline? Paper wallets seem to be popular. How do you transfer BTC from a paper wallet to an online wallet for spending?
I personally find that paper wallets are a mediocre solution. They look nice and are sort of functional (except you have to import the whole balance and then broadcast from a comp connected to the net which poses a security risk) and can be encrypted (with BIP38) if done correctly. You would be far better off looking at cold storage - have Armory/Electrum on an offline air gapped computer and use it to sign txs that you make on your online computer. That way you never have your private keys exposed on an online computer. I would prefer Electrum as you can backup your seed physically and thanks to its deterministic nature you'll have all your private keys even if your hardware fails. |
|
|
|
|
|
byt411
|
|
May 18, 2014, 02:13:26 AM |
|
It sounds like everyone is going to know my balance if I don't use a mixing service and that's OK. The important thing is that they can't take it. What is the best way to go about storing the bulk of my BTC offline? Paper wallets seem to be popular. How do you transfer BTC from a paper wallet to an online wallet for spending?
You can use any wallet to import the private key, and you can spend funds from that wallet. So you create a new private key on your computer, print it onto a piece of paper, and delete it from your computer. Then when you want to spend those funds, you type the private key from the piece of paper into your computer? I don't see how that offers much extra security since your private key will then be known if your computer has been compromised. What am I missing? Aha, that's not how it works. You generate a private key on an offline computer, abd then print it out. That way keyloggers cannot send the data to the hacker. Also, you don't have to type the whole private key in, you can just scan a QR code. |
|
|
|
|
|
Malin Keshar
|
|
May 18, 2014, 08:29:59 AM |
|
y, it is good. If you separete each receiving into one address, people will have a really hard time trying to guess how many btc do you have.
But do it right with the backup:
don't put all the key in a single device
don't make only one backup
don't have one big stack in one address that is used to transfer small funds to other address that will be used to make small payments, since it is easily backtracked
another alternative maybe is use bitcoin mixers, just dont ask me about a reliable one
|
|
|
|
|
alexrossi
Legendary
Offline
Activity: 3724
Merit: 1739
Join the world-leading crypto sportsbook NOW!
|
|
May 18, 2014, 10:26:51 AM |
|
Aha, that's not how it works. You generate a private key on an offline computer, abd then print it out. That way keyloggers cannot send the data to the hacker.
That's not completely true, if your computer is already compromised, you can even cut off the internet connection, but when you will re-connect the PC, a keylogger will be able to send the infos catched in the offline session to an attacker. So the best thing that you can do is basically use a live CD to obtain a clear environment |
|
|
|
|
