diff options
Diffstat (limited to 'bip-0131.mediawiki')
| -rw-r--r-- | bip-0131.mediawiki | 22 |
1 files changed, 22 insertions, 0 deletions
diff --git a/bip-0131.mediawiki b/bip-0131.mediawiki index c30ef54..3b1661c 100644 --- a/bip-0131.mediawiki +++ b/bip-0131.mediawiki @@ -77,6 +77,28 @@ the user when their wallet contains many UTXOs that qualify it to benefit from a coalescing transaction. Wallets should not simply replace non-coalescing transactions with coalescing transactions in all instances. +== Isn't this BIP bad because it encourage address re-use? == + +Address re-use comes in two forms: reuse from the ''sender'', and re-use from the ''receiver''. + +Re-use by the sender is basically using the same address for the change output. This is generally considered bad +since people looking through your transaction history can determine who you do business with. When +you generate a new address for every change, your privacy is conserved as it is impossible to know which +output is a recipient, and which output is the change output. This BIP has '''no effect''' on re-use +by the sender. + +On the other hand, address re-use by the ''receiver'' occurs under completely different circumstances. +When you publish an address and have multiple people send to that address, you are engaging in address re-use +from th receiver. This activity has historically been considered bad because it leads to re-using a private key. +When you re-use a private key too many times, you run the risk of somebody performing statistical analysis +on the multiple signatures, which can lead to an attacker finding out your private key. + +This BIP introduces a way to spend multiple inputs without re-using the private key. In a sense, this BIP +fixes the problem that makes address re-use bad for the receiver. After this BIP becomes implemented +and deployed, address re-use by the receiver will no longer be considered bad form. + + + ==Copyright== This document is placed in the public domain. |