Someone's Monero address can still be linked if one was to use it for a withdrawal from an exchange and then reuse it again. I like how the mimblewimble address works, where addresses are generated on the spot. Is there something in the works for Monero to have only on the spot addresses?

2 Answers 2


Someone's Monero address can still be linked if one was to use it for a withdrawal from an exchange and then reuse it again.

No. Monero uses stealth addresses for the outputs. Therefore sending from an exchange to your wallet, the exchange knows the address it sent to, but the outputs in that tx are one-time stealth addresses. When you spend those one-time outputs, they are mixed in a ring of decoys for which an observer has no way of knowing which output is then being spent. At no point does your wallet address ever appear on the blockchain.

  • 1
    yes I understand that, but the fact that you need to put in an address into an exchange for withdrawal can link the user if they use the same address elsewhere. May 15, 2019 at 14:52
  • But if a user uses their wallet address elsewhere, it still doesn't show up on the blockchain. All that colluding parties would be able to know is they both have the same user. You would have had to share your address with those colluding parties outside of the blockchain. E.g. withdrawing from one exchange and depositing in another would not leak the wallet address, but, withdrawing from two different colluding exchanges where you give them the same withdrawal address, they could link your user profiles.
    – jtgrassie
    May 15, 2019 at 15:09
  • Oh, and MW doesn't solve for the colluding parties I gave in previous comment, they could simply collude with MW/Grin by sharing the TX IDs to link profiles.
    – jtgrassie
    May 15, 2019 at 15:18
  • 2
    I think @Patoshiパトシ is simply talking about giving an address to an exchange, and using the same wallet address with another web site. Now the exchange and the other site can see they're dealing with the same person if they collude. The answer to that privacy concern is subaddresses.
    – knaccc
    May 15, 2019 at 16:17
  • 2
    "how would you go about solving colluding parties then?" <- use subaddresses. That way you give a unique/different address to each party.
    – jtgrassie
    May 15, 2019 at 16:44

Your concern was the very motivation for subaddresses, which is a technique that generates unique (slightly modified) stealth addresses for handing out to different parties, thus preventing off-chain linkability while keeping scanning times constant. See also this SE question and initial github discussion.

Your Answer

By clicking “Post Your Answer”, you agree to our terms of service and acknowledge you have read our privacy policy.

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged or ask your own question.