And if there is not a specific good reason why this is the case, can I suggest that it would be quite a lot better for privacy to make the receiving t-addresses be single use and spin up a new one for each transaction?
5 Likes
We intend to add address rotation.
8 Likes
A quick mention of another privacy pet peeve: wallets should always warn users when merging t-address inputs (sending a transaction with multiple inputs) because this stores a permanent record on the blockchain that the same user likely controlled both addresses, enabling clustering.
Perhaps
This transaction will permanently reveal to the public:
- The input addresses used to fund it
- That the owner of these input addresses is likely the same person
- The recipient (if t-addr)
- The amounts sent to the recipient (if t-addr)
- The date and time of the transaction
- If not running your own lightwalletd node, it is possible your IP addresses are logged by this server: 1.2.3.4:443
Confirm?
Personally I love T-addresses and I think that they’re a huge, if controversial, differentiator to have around. But we really could do better to steward the UX around them for less obsessive people.
4 Likes
If the process of consolidating transparent funds to shielded in zashi is doing this 
kind of merging, then i vote for changing that to making each t-address → z-address a discrete transaction.
1 Like
@joshs any chance you have a ballpark timeframe for when this may land?
1 Like
Likely Q2.
3 Likes
Solid request, looking forward to the t-address rotation update