Taint checker list

[kjj]

The worst part is that I don't think that anyone can stop such a service from existing.  Misguided as it may be, enough people are going to want it.

[Kettenmonster]

What about whitelist then? Same feature, but instead you whitelist trusted senders and nobody else can send money to you.

All Coins = whitelist + blacklist + unkown
Everything that is just a subset of all coins can be used as replacement for the term Tainted Coins bullshit
The argumentation will work the same way.
Think of bitcoins as if they were firewood, once in the stove ... lost for you ... regardless whomsoever had put them in the stove. Heat is there wood is gone. Now you can ask for a refund for stolen wood in heat or wood. But what if this was stolen before?

The difference is you can´t tell firewood apart but you can tell bitcoins apart.
But that doesn´t solve the issue. It just says you know your money is dirty. It does not help you to decide on any money on its way to you.

[Lupus_Yonderboy]

My promise:
If tainted databases do exist I will be buying tainted coins for the sole purpose of spamming them to people who use tainted coins databases and let them rack up massive fees in trying to return them.  The bad news is that means I might have to deal with filth like coinexchanger to get my spam currency.  (shudder)

Translation: Play the way I tell you to play or I'll shit in the sandbox.

People should be free to choose whether or not they accept certain coins for transactions. Forcing them to accept and deal in stolen property is wrong. If they choose to do so then so be it, but nobody should force them to. I thought one of the benefits of a free market meant you could choose who you do business with, and why. Guess I was wrong.

Let me put my tinfoil hat on and speculate that those who are crying loudest against this have a vested interest in keeping the status quo because they know they have stolen coins in their possession.

[jancsika]

The worst part is that I don't think that anyone can stop such a service from existing.  Misguided as it may be, enough people are going to want it.

And they're going to continue to want it if a large enough amount of coins regularly get stolen from well-known Bitcoin services.

Remember that when Mt. Gox got hacked, one guy claimed to have bought over 250,000 coins and withdrew only about 650 of them because he thought withdrawing all of them would have been exploiting a bug.  That's quite a large percentage of the total coins mined, the potential theft of which hinged on one guy simply deciding whether or not he wanted to try to take all of them!

The fact that people are actually storing sizable numbers of Bitcoins online, before there is widespread, simple support in the client for multisignature transactions is just ridiculous.  So is trying to convince the same people _not_ to concoct coin-taint tracking schemes by any means other than direclty improving Bitcoin security and making it easier to implement.

[Kettenmonster]

People should be free to choose whether or not they accept certain coins for transactions.

Sounds jolly good in my ears, too good to be true.
Question: How will they decide?
They have to decide in advance about a thing they can´t see.
Ok they can reject those coins later, but how to get the firewood returned?

Assume me having false coins in the wallet. Should I return them to the so called appropriate owner or the one whom I just sent some of my coins as he has tainted coins now. What if I mixed some tainted with non tainted coins and spent all of them?

[Lupus_Yonderboy]

People should be free to choose whether or not they accept certain coins for transactions.

Sounds jolly good in my ears, too good to be true.
Question: How will they decide?
They have to decide in advance about a thing they can´t see.
Ok they can reject those coins later, but how to get the firewood returned?

Assume me having false coins in the wallet. Should I return them to the so called appropriate owner or the one whom I just sent some of my coins as he has tainted coins now. What if I mixed some tainted with non tainted coins and spent all of them?

Off the top of my head, I'd say a hotwallet to for incoming transactions, if the coins pass inspection then they get put into the main wallet. You don't ship whatever good or perform whatever service until you are satisified with the coins. There are very few businesses that require an instantaneous response when someone sends them bitcoins, so a minor delay to verify coins won't hurt. If the coins are tainted it would be up to the recipient to determine what they do with them.

This could, in fact, be written right into the bitcoin client. User provides a list to the client of what he feels are tainted coins and the client then scans incoming transactions and compares them to the blockchain. The user is alerted if there is a problem. I wonder if etoh can't be convinced via a rather large bounty to implement such a feature in his Armory client.

For those of you who think this will kill Bitcoin, then perhaps Bitcoin was never a viable project anyway and should die in a fire and we should move on to Bitcoin 2.0.

[RaggedMonk]

You cannot prevent people from transferring coins to your address.  So people who disagree with the tainted coins system could browse the blockchain for "clean" addresses, and do giant batch transactions sending each address a satoshi.

If they are mining as well, they can include the transactions in their own blocks, so transaction fees for sending large, spammy transactions will be sent back to themselves. 

If you send these satoshis back, you will still have to pay the transaction fee: they can make your coins tainted, or make you go broke trying to prevent them from being tainted.

[dooglus]

You cannot prevent people from transferring coins to your address.  So people who disagree with the tainted coins system could browse the blockchain for "clean" addresses, and do giant batch transactions sending each address a satoshi.

I think you misunderstand.  Addresses don't get tainted, transaction outputs do.  It's possible to have clean and tainted coins at the same address, from different transactions.

[Lupus_Yonderboy]

You cannot prevent people from transferring coins to your address.  So people who disagree with the tainted coins system could browse the blockchain for "clean" addresses, and do giant batch transactions sending each address a satoshi.

If they are mining as well, they can include the transactions in their own blocks, so transaction fees for sending large, spammy transactions will be sent back to themselves. 

You only get the transaction fee if you are the miner that actually finds the block. Otherwise someone else gets it. This mechanism protects Bitcoin from spam attacks disrupting the network. Otherwise a malicious attacker could try to spam the network with millions of transactions. The transaction fees make this too expensive to pull off. So no, somebody isn't going to perform an attack like that.

If you send these satoshis back, you will still have to pay the transaction fee: they can make your coins tainted, or make you go broke trying to prevent them from being tainted.

The Bitcoin protocol allows you to specify the number of and the precise transaction inputs to use in a transaction. Meaning if you sent me 10,000 satoshis from 10,000 different wallets, I could send them all back to you in a single transaction, and *only* those satoshis regardless of the other coins in my wallet. Or, I could (one day) simply blacklist those transaction inputs so my client never uses them. Meaning that the tainted coins die right there. They never get used, they are out of circulation, and the rest of my coins are pristine. If you follow the coins via the blockchain they will simply stop at that address. Bitcoins are atomic, they have to be or the entire system falls apart. You can trace every single satoshi in your wallet all the way back to its genesis block.

 

[RaggedMonk]

You cannot prevent people from transferring coins to your address.  So people who disagree with the tainted coins system could browse the blockchain for "clean" addresses, and do giant batch transactions sending each address a satoshi.

If they are mining as well, they can include the transactions in their own blocks, so transaction fees for sending large, spammy transactions will be sent back to themselves. 

You only get the transaction fee if you are the miner that actually finds the block. Otherwise someone else gets it. This mechanism protects Bitcoin from spam attacks disrupting the network. Otherwise a malicious attacker could try to spam the network with millions of transactions. The transaction fees make this too expensive to pull off. So no, somebody isn't going to perform an attack like that.

If you send these satoshis back, you will still have to pay the transaction fee: they can make your coins tainted, or make you go broke trying to prevent them from being tainted.

The Bitcoin protocol allows you to specify the number of and the precise transaction inputs to use in a transaction. Meaning if you sent me 10,000 satoshis from 10,000 different wallets, I could send them all back to you in a single transaction, and *only* those satoshis regardless of the other coins in my wallet. Or, I could (one day) simply blacklist those transaction inputs so my client never uses them. Meaning that the tainted coins die right there. They never get used, they are out of circulation, and the rest of my coins are pristine. If you follow the coins via the blockchain they will simply stop at that address. Bitcoins are atomic, they have to be or the entire system falls apart. You can trace every single satoshi in your wallet all the way back to its genesis block.

 

As a miner, you can hoard a transaction.  So you could create a transaction that does not get broadcast unless your miner finds it, in which case it goes through.

I was talking about sending 10,000 satoshis to 10,000 clean addresses, rather than what you are saying, because I think this sort of "shotgun spray" would be much more effective at tainting.

As for the last part of your response, that is entirely true.  But with current software there is a high chance of making a mistake and accidentally sending the tainted satoshi through, tainting your target recipient.

Dooglus is right though: a smart implementation of taint could prevent many of these problems by tainting transaction outputs rather than whole addresses. 

[coinft]

D&T's post is spot on.  There are too many unsolvable problems that taint tracking introduces: it will hurt honest actors more than thieves.

+1

[coinft]

That's a stupid idea.

If this goes through, I'll buy up tainted coins for cheap. Then I'll mine dummy txs to myself, using the tainted coins for huge txs fees. Since I won't broadcast them, sooner or later ... PROFIT

Now if someone decides to taint coinbases too if they include tainted fees that's even worse. In this case miners will start a war, because they won't like having their blocks taken from them when I declare some of my satoshis used in fees stolen retroactively. And I'll make sure to include a satoshi in every mined block, thus sabotage mining completely.

Either way, the potential for abuse and damage is huge and far outweighs benefit.

-coinft.

[Lupus_Yonderboy]

That's a stupid idea.

If this goes through, I'll buy up tainted coins for cheap. Then I'll mine dummy txs to myself, using the tainted coins for huge txs fees. Since I won't broadcast them, sooner or later ... PROFIT

That should only take you 6 or 7 months mining by yourself, provided the difficulty stays the same (and it won't). Again, spotting the outsize txn fee won't be hard and marking the entire block as tainted will be easy to do.

Now if someone decides to taint coinbases too if they include tainted fees that's even worse. In this case miners will start a war, because they won't like having their blocks taken from them when I declare some of my satoshis used in fees stolen retroactively. And I'll make sure to include a satoshi in every mined block, thus sabotage mining completely.

Either way, the potential for abuse and damage is huge and far outweighs benefit.

-coinft.

You will be a long time including a tainted satoshi with every mined block. Also, why do you think 1)anyone would care about your 'stolen' blocks, and 2)people would declare an entire block tainted because of a single tainted satoshi in its coinbase?

If you think you can destroy Bitcoin, then please try. Personally I think that it is a bit more robust than that and can withstand whatever you can throw at it.

[kjj]

That's a stupid idea.

If this goes through, I'll buy up tainted coins for cheap. Then I'll mine dummy txs to myself, using the tainted coins for huge txs fees. Since I won't broadcast them, sooner or later ... PROFIT

That should only take you 6 or 7 months mining by yourself, provided the difficulty stays the same (and it won't). Again, spotting the outsize txn fee won't be hard and marking the entire block as tainted will be easy to do.

Someone that stole thousands of coins could easily include overly generous fees in lots of blocks, not just their own.  Spotting those fees won't be hard, but most of them will be decoys.

Real life money laundering also has poor returns, so don't imagine that someone would be unwilling to lose 90% to have a clean 10%.

[DeathAndTaxes]

That's a stupid idea.

If this goes through, I'll buy up tainted coins for cheap. Then I'll mine dummy txs to myself, using the tainted coins for huge txs fees. Since I won't broadcast them, sooner or later ... PROFIT

That should only take you 6 or 7 months mining by yourself, provided the difficulty stays the same (and it won't). Again, spotting the outsize txn fee won't be hard and marking the entire block as tainted will be easy to do.

What about w/ 20 GH/s.  What about if mining pools did it to increase revenue?  Marking whole block as tainted?  So if I include a tainted laundry transaction and 999 other valid transactions then all the unrelated transactions become tainted too?  Wow.  I think you realize how foolish that is. 

If any element of the block is "taint free" (like transaction fees paid to coinbase) one can simply funnel the coins there.  You claim it will take a long time but a 20 GH/s farm will find about 2 blocks per week.  If 2% of transaction is cleaned via fees per block then roughly 1/2 of the tainted amount will be clean in 3 months.

Are you going to taint the coinbase of every block w/ >=2% fees?  If so some sabotage is very easy.  Simply submit some tainted transactions w/ 2%+ fee to the network and let a pool pick it up.  If deepbit picked up one then 2,000+ innocent miner's now have tainted coins according to your precious database.

If fees remain taint free then cleaning coins via private mining becomes trivially easy.  With a higher % going to private fees and more hashing power one could clean funds even faster. 80%+ of the principal in 30 days.  Using transactions w/ 3% fee rate and 100 GH/s you could clean 70% of any principal amount in 30 days, and 99% in 90 days.

Miners will do a lot for > PPS.  You don't think someone will start a 100%+ PPS service to get 100 GH/s+ and use them to launder coins?  Someone either could do it for themselves or they could do it as a service for clients.  Charge someone 5% to launder coins, pay miners 103% PPS, keep 2% profit.

Starting to see how the only people snagged by your asinine "taint list" would be noobs, 3rd parties, and patsies.

[muyuu]

If you think you can destroy Bitcoin, then please try.

You seem to be dead-set to it, together with some folks at MtGox.

[Polvos]

That's a stupid idea.

If this goes through, I'll buy up tainted coins for cheap. Then I'll mine dummy txs to myself, using the tainted coins for huge txs fees. Since I won't broadcast them, sooner or later ... PROFIT

That should only take you 6 or 7 months mining by yourself, provided the difficulty stays the same (and it won't). Again, spotting the outsize txn fee won't be hard and marking the entire block as tainted will be easy to do.

What about w/ 20 GH/s.  What about if mining pools did it to increase revenue?  Marking whole block as tainted?  So if I include a tainted laundry transaction and 999 other valid transactions then all the unrelated transactions become tainted too?  Wow.  I think you realize how foolish that is. 

If any element of the block is "taint free" (like transaction fees paid to coinbase) one can simply funnel the coins there.  You claim it will take a long time but a 20 GH/s farm will find about 2 blocks per week.  If 2% of transaction is cleaned via fees per block then roughly 1/2 of the tainted amount will be clean in 3 months.

Are you going to taint the coinbase of every block w/ >=2% fees?  If so some sabotage is very easy.  Simply submit some tainted transactions w/ 2%+ fee to the network and let a pool pick it up.  If deepbit picked up one then 2,000+ innocent miner's now have tainted coins according to your precious database.

If fees remain taint free then cleaning coins via private mining becomes trivially easy.  With a higher % going to private fees and more hashing power one could clean funds even faster. 80%+ of the principal in 30 days.  Using transactions w/ 3% fee rate and 100 GH/s you could clean 70% of any principal amount in 30 days, and 99% in 90 days.

Miners will do a lot for > PPS.  You don't think someone will start a 100%+ PPS service to get 100 GH/s+ and use them to launder coins?  Someone either could do it for themselves or they could do it as a service for clients.  Charge someone 5% to launder coins, pay miners 103% PPS, keep 2% profit.

Starting to see how the only people snagged by your asinine "taint list" would be noobs, 3rd parties, and patsies.

What you made here, my sir, is a really great post. I see a brilliant future in mining. Maybe its time to start thinking about funding a dark mining pool.

[Herodes]

Tainted Coins bullshit = death of Bitcoin.  Period.

Agreed.

[Lupus_Yonderboy]

That's a stupid idea.

If this goes through, I'll buy up tainted coins for cheap. Then I'll mine dummy txs to myself, using the tainted coins for huge txs fees. Since I won't broadcast them, sooner or later ... PROFIT

That should only take you 6 or 7 months mining by yourself, provided the difficulty stays the same (and it won't). Again, spotting the outsize txn fee won't be hard and marking the entire block as tainted will be easy to do.

What about w/ 20 GH/s.  What about if mining pools did it to increase revenue?

Marking whole block as tainted?  So if I include a tainted laundry transaction and 999 other valid transactions then all the unrelated transactions become tainted too?  Wow.  

So in the following situations:
transaction 1) taintend coins + untainted coins -> output w/ large transaction fee
999 other untainted transactions

Is the transaction fee also tainted now?  Well you may have just screwed over a mining pool and possibly thousands of individual miners when the reward gets split.

Other transactions tainted?
Well that is a non-starter.

I meant the coinbase portion of the block, obviously the inputs and outputs of all the legitmate txns don't matter and can be sorted normally. Sorry I wasn't clearer 

Only the non-fee portion of original transaction?  Great so someone can pay a mining pool to clean their coins via transaction fees?  If so then eventually every single "tainted coin" will simply be cleaned by going through multiple passes of transaction fees.  You claim it will take a long time but a 20 GH/s farm will find about 2 blocks per week.  If 2% of transaction is cleaned via fees per block then roughly 1/2 of the stolen amount will be clean in 3 months.

Are you going to taint the coinbase of every block w/ >=2% fees?  If so some sabotage is very easy.  Simply include some tainted normal transactions with 2%+ fee and let other pools pick them up.  If deepbit picked up one then 2,000+ miner's now have tainted coins according to your precious database.

If you don't then cleaning coins via private mining becomes trivially easy.  With a higher % going to private fees (say 3%) and more hashing power (say 100 GH/s) one could clean 80%+ of the principal in 30 days.

I'm gonna go out on a limb here and say that none of the major pools are going to start laundering coins. Any pools that do will be quickly spotted in the blockchain. Your 2% fee of your private 20 GH/s is also BS. 2% of what? Currently fees for most blocks are well under 1btc per block. You will mine for a very long time if you are finding a block every two weeks and have fees that are under 1 btc. Any blocks with greater fees can be flagged and examined. 1btc is arbitrary, that can change (and probably will).

Miners will do a lot for > PPS.  Don't think someone will start a 110% PPS service to get 100 GH/s+ and use them to launder coins?

You assume every miner is as mercenary as you are. They are not. And again, any coinbase found by said service can simply be marked as tainted. Most miners won't mine somewhere that pays them in coins they can't sell at the exchange.

Starting to see how the only people snagged by your asinine "taint list" would be noobs and patsies. 

What I am starting to see is the noobs and patsies being snagged by your hyperbolic rhetoric. It is readily apparent that checking for stolen coins will hurt your profits somehow, given the virulent 'sky is falling' assault on the idea. If you don't like the fact that someone can go through the blockchain and trace every single transaction (and then make decisions based on it), you can try to change the protocol (HA!) or start your own blockchain. Your willingness to attempt to destroy Bitcoin if anybody tries this says a lot about your character (or lack thereof). As I have stated before, Bitcoin is far more robust than you think, and if it is not then it should die in a fire and we should move on Bitcoin 2.0

[muyuu]

You assume every miner is as mercenary as you are. They are not. And again, any coinbase found by said service can simply be marked as tainted. Most miners won't mine somewhere that pays them in coins they can't sell at the exchange.

Actually, I think making bitcoin more anonymous and fungible is a worthy cause. The right thing to do.

As for mercenaries, you only need a small % of all miners to enter a scheme like this and fascist exchanges would be completely overwhelmed in their regulatory mess.