Timeline for What privacy or security trade offs are associated with not running your own full node?
Current License: CC BY-SA 3.0
7 events
| when toggle format | what | by | license | comment | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| May 11, 2017 at 11:08 | comment | added | Ginger Ale | I figured this post by smooth should be linked somewhere here. | |
| Nov 2, 2016 at 16:32 | comment | added | user36303 | It knows. That's why this is now changed so the wallet picks which outputs to use, and asks for them. Including its own. | |
| Nov 2, 2016 at 15:12 | comment | added | kenshi84 | I couldn't get this part: "just request twice as many fake outputs, and pick locally". Doesn't the daemon know anyway which output in the ring is the one it didn't send to the wallet? | |
| Oct 13, 2016 at 16:38 | comment | added | BitShrink | Another issue you might want to mention is that running your own node intermittently, just when you are making transactions, allows correlation between your IP address and your transactions. Tor or Kovri could help with this; or use an always-on node. | |
| Oct 13, 2016 at 8:00 | history | edited | user36303 | CC BY-SA 3.0 |
added 338 characters in body
|
| Jul 20, 2016 at 16:09 | vote | accept | 254123179 | ||
| Jul 19, 2016 at 21:30 | history | answered | user36303 | CC BY-SA 3.0 |