Nostr Web Client

What can we do about address reuse?

There are so many exchanges that give their users only one receive address ever. Even hardware wallet users often don't bother fetching their device to generate a new address ever. Sending to such addresses also makes the funds of the sender more trackable and ultimately bitcoin less fungible for all.

Convincing people to use Bitcoin is hard enough but then to bother them to change their address for each transaction is such a hard sell. 😢

nostr:npub18dlusgmprudw46nracaldxe9hz4pdmrws8g6lsusy6qglcv5x48s0lh8x3

Reply to this note

Please Login to reply.

Discussion

Martin 4mo ago

The solution is obvious: Don't use exchanges.

We have to work towards circular bitcoin economies. Everything else is just noise.

SatsAndSports 4mo ago

Agreed. But not super practical today.

I think the current blocker is that most merchants don't accept yet. They (correctly) reason that they won't get new customers via accepting it

The (understandably) don't want the hassle of having to collect magical internet money and the hassle of converting it to fiat. That will slowly change as more normies, including merchants, realise how good it is.

In the meantime, all we can do is keep improving the technology for every part of the system, and educate more people about the number-go-up technology 😃, so that there is minimal friction as the normies gradually decide to get on board

Martin 4mo ago

We can also use P2P exchanges like Robosats. But the problem remains: If your bank sees that you are wiring and receiving money to/from strangers all over the country/continent, they will close your account, even if it's just lots of many small transactions.

Super Testnet 4mo ago

Robosats is not a p2p exchange

There is a clear middleman who plays the same role as a middleman like coinbase or binance

Underground does not equal p2p

Martin 4mo ago

It's definitely nothing like Coinbase or Binance.

Super Testnet 4mo ago

They don't have *those* things in common but they have several other things in common

Leo Wandersleb 4mo ago

Normal people are confused about the changing address, too and prefer to stick to the old, tried and tested address. All the time after repeat complaints I have heard.

waxwing 4mo ago

Re: exchanges, they were forced to use this policy, generally. It's not laziness, like it was 10+ years ago. Re: hardware wallets, that shouldn't be a problem, we have watch-only with xpubs, right.

Leo Wandersleb 4mo ago

I love receiving and paying to xpub but noobs don't love handing out xpubs.

waxwing 4mo ago

Well you shouldn't have to hand over xpubs, right. Software should be able to let you get a fresh receiving address.

Leo Wandersleb 4mo ago

I'm not familiar with any standards that would facilitate repeat payments without repeat communication other than xpub. I get paid to xpub when I'm in repeat payment contracts and also pay preferably to such xpubs where I can pay to a new address without having to communicate a new address in the moment of doing payroll for example but it's too cumbersome to expect people new to bitcoin to go that route. If I don't hand over the xpub, each payment needs interaction.

waxwing 4mo ago

Oh, repeat payment without communication. I was just thinking of p2p payments.

The Daniel 🖖 4mo ago

Also, governments love address re-use and they’re trying to restrict wallets and exchanges from generating new ones…you know, to fight terrorism or something.

GHOST 4mo ago

Not sure about exchanges, haven't used one in years. Most wallets now of days generate a new receiving address every time. If yours doesn't, change wallets. Or better yet look into silent addresses like on cake wallet.

Leo Wandersleb 4mo ago

I haven't tried silent payments yet but this looks like a poor choice of products that support it so far:

Of course, my wallets all create a new address every time and I wouldn't use any other product but I have to pay individuals that more often than not want me to pay them to the same address over and over again. I can remind them about this being bad for them and for me but ultimately I don't have the comfort of too many options, so I keep going with it instead of not paying to these addresses again and again. Maybe I should apply an address-reuse-fee 🤔

moonsettler 4mo ago

you should try it out in Cake! the UX is horrible enough to send you running for the hills. they obviously made a great effort to implement it in a non-cucked way.

Kruw 4mo ago

Silent Payments (BIP352) solved this problem already - https://github.com/bitcoin/bips/blob/master/bip-0352.mediawiki

Leo Wandersleb 4mo ago

No. That's like saying Monero solved that problem. The problem is unsolved and maybe some day SP will make a dent but so far it doesn't.

As long as my payees don't give me the option to pay them to an SP address, the problem very much stands.