Replying to Avatar Super Testnet

>90% of the time it's going to be the real destination

You don't know that

By default, surveillance has to deal with this heuristic: the sender doesn't know if the recipient's invoice uses a trampoline node or not. So he doesn't know if the pubkey in the invoice even belongs to the recipient.

In monero, the sender DOES know that information. The pubkey in a monero address always belongs to the recipient.

In monero, surveillance is possible by default

In lightning, it's not
Avatar
Hanshan 8mo ago

the reason you are a disingenuous actor in this space is because you argue based on unstated assumptions

like positing access to the sending wallet

Reply to this note

Please Login to reply.

Discussion

Avatar
Super Testnet 8mo ago

Please provide an example where chain analysts could not access the sending wallet

Here are two examples where they could access it and caught their target:

1. Finnish authorities trace monero from swap service to monero wallet to binance: https://cointelegraph.com/news/finnish-authorities-traced-monero-vastaamo-hack

2. Chainalysis traced monero and caught a Columbian criminal who used it: https://cointelegraph.com/news/chainalysis-leak-monero-traceability

Avatar
Hanshan 8mo ago

oh please

ask me to prove a negative lol

not having access is the default condition.

the CA video is FULL of him showing transactions they cant trace.

you're just butthurt monero price is up and reaching for the usual FUD.

Avatar
Super Testnet 8mo ago

there are plenty of articles that cover how chainalysis finds their perps

I'm just asking for one where they did it without finding the sender

In every case I'm aware of, they find the sender first (often, they themselves *are* the sender, e.g. in the Finnish case I provided), then start tracing the payment once the recipient moves it -- they try to find out if he sent it to an exchange, or batched it together with his other payments, or did anything else useful with it