From 314e87f9c0c1e3920d2954a2ae3fb70473c887a2 Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001 From: Chris Priest Date: Mon, 14 Mar 2016 15:16:51 -0700 Subject: added paragraph about address reuse --- bip-0131.mediawiki | 22 ++++++++++++++++++++++ 1 file changed, 22 insertions(+) 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. -- cgit v1.2.3 From 46a91a8dc4936af3b3d8f3de7f36487e6aff2631 Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001 From: Chris Priest Date: Mon, 14 Mar 2016 15:51:14 -0700 Subject: fixed typos and wording --- bip-0131.mediawiki | 10 ++++------ 1 file changed, 4 insertions(+), 6 deletions(-) diff --git a/bip-0131.mediawiki b/bip-0131.mediawiki index 3b1661c..1efe713 100644 --- a/bip-0131.mediawiki +++ b/bip-0131.mediawiki @@ -79,7 +79,7 @@ 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''. +Address re-use comes in two forms: re-use by the ''sender'', and re-use by 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 @@ -89,16 +89,14 @@ 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 +from the 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 an attacker 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 +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. -- cgit v1.2.3