camosoul
Well-known member
I wonder if it would be possible for darksend to keep denominated funds denominated?
To exemplify the meaning:
My wallet denominates into 1, 10, and 100 chunks.
I send 111 to Jane for "services rendered."
Why bind this into a 111 tx? Why not send the 100, 10, and 1 to Jane, such that it doesn't need to be re-denominated, and the tx looks like a denom function itself? The tx is hidden among other denominations. Or, to say it a 3rd way, TXs and Denom do not look any different on the blockchain.
One address was sent, yeah... Could put 1, 10, and 100 on the same address... This makes it look different, I understand. If denom randomly did that sort of thing, too, it would make the fog foggier. Sometimes, denom sends multiple chunks to the same address. In deep sets, this actually adds to obfuscation, not detract from it. No way to tell the difference between a denom and a tx. It might even be used to consolidate dust, and prevent dust from being traced on the chain. Wallets could backtrack through the MN network. Send to an address, it's a DS, wallet with provkey declares a few more addresses to keep the funds split on... Not sure that would be feasible. Just thinking out loud... With a TX that can look like a denom, and a denom that can look like a tx, there's no way to tell which is which. Moar foggier.
It seems like bloat up front, but what it saves later is a wash. Potential dust consolidation would actually reduce. Don't have to re-denom funds that never got undenomed. Could force it in "expert" mode or coin control or some crap...
Just an idea... It ain't broken the way it is now. Just thought this might act as an improvement...
To exemplify the meaning:
My wallet denominates into 1, 10, and 100 chunks.
I send 111 to Jane for "services rendered."
Why bind this into a 111 tx? Why not send the 100, 10, and 1 to Jane, such that it doesn't need to be re-denominated, and the tx looks like a denom function itself? The tx is hidden among other denominations. Or, to say it a 3rd way, TXs and Denom do not look any different on the blockchain.
One address was sent, yeah... Could put 1, 10, and 100 on the same address... This makes it look different, I understand. If denom randomly did that sort of thing, too, it would make the fog foggier. Sometimes, denom sends multiple chunks to the same address. In deep sets, this actually adds to obfuscation, not detract from it. No way to tell the difference between a denom and a tx. It might even be used to consolidate dust, and prevent dust from being traced on the chain. Wallets could backtrack through the MN network. Send to an address, it's a DS, wallet with provkey declares a few more addresses to keep the funds split on... Not sure that would be feasible. Just thinking out loud... With a TX that can look like a denom, and a denom that can look like a tx, there's no way to tell which is which. Moar foggier.
It seems like bloat up front, but what it saves later is a wash. Potential dust consolidation would actually reduce. Don't have to re-denom funds that never got undenomed. Could force it in "expert" mode or coin control or some crap...
Just an idea... It ain't broken the way it is now. Just thought this might act as an improvement...