Yeah, I’m not a dev at all. But I can see we have rotating u addresses, so it seems like it should be trivial to also have rotating t addresses.
Some changes in Core were needed for the t-address to be rotating if i’m not mistaken. I believe Josh or someone at ECC mentioned it.
It’s obviously something useful and would already be implemented if it was trivial to do. Hopefully they can come sooner than later.
100%.
¯\_(ツ)_/¯
Sorry, but I have no idea what you are talking about. Pretty sure you also have no idea what I am talking about.
Yes and worse; everyone in the universe can see that Alice gets paid by both Bob and the exchange and everyone / everything else who pays her and her single, re-used taddr becomes a single point in common for all of those transactions. That’s an anti-privacy linkage pattern which is trivially erased from existence by using trivial-to-develop (at this point since the wheel has already been invented many times), single-use public receiving addresses.
2 Likes
You all need to argue against the actual reasoning behind not supporting it.
I happen to agree this should be done but you can’t just ignore the issues with it.
1 Like
I don’t think anything in that thread is a valid reason to not support t-address rotation. There are definitely some good reasons in there for doing it correctly rather than sloppily.
2 Likes
Then all that’s left is to wait for it to be done correctly 
Sorry, but I’m going to keep complaining on behalf of people who don’t have any clue what a t-addr is and who keep reading all the Zcash-related social media telling them that all their ZEC transactions are completely private.
You are saying that there is an issue when 3 separate entities (business or people ) send their BTC to the same taddr in Zashi.
I am saying that if they are separate entities, they would not be using the same phone, therefore they would have different installations of Zashi and different transparent addresses.