Sounds good in theory, but vast majority don't use unannounced channels. Ironically it also destroys your plausible deniability *if* caught. You're also still using a transparent base layer to move into and eventually settle on (force close/justice transactions) and most users HODL on the base layer. I think BOLT12 helps a lot with privacy, but there are fundamental issues and natural incentives with LN that I'm not sure you can change that directly or indirectly reduce privacy and sovereignty.

I do agree that offchain transactions, but on an encrypted base layer, is probably ideal for the best possible privacy

Reply to this note

Please Login to reply.

Discussion

This chart says otherwise.

How would they track the LN payments happening between opening and closing the channel? You could have channels open for years too.

Using tor =/= unannounced channels

"...receivers can try and doxx senders in other ways. Like, what IP address did they use when they requested an invoice.

As for the onchain footprint, if someone is watching your addresses, they will see that your funds were used to open a channel with another node. They will also see the name of the node you opened the channel to. When you close the channel, two outputs are created. Each node gets an output. One output is usually larger than the other simply because channels rarely close in a perfectly balanced state.

However, most nodes will just reopen more channels using the outputs from channel close transactions. Therefore, if we wait long enough, the odds are high that my node will use my output to create another channel. Once my node does this, I've essentially doxxed that my node."

Not impossible to avoid, but most users won't do all these things.