The traditional banking model achieves a level of privacy by limiting access to information to the parties involved and the trusted third party. The necessity to announce all transactions publicly precludes this method, but privacy can still be maintained by breaking the flow of information in another place: by keeping public keys anonymous. The public can see that someone is sending an amount to someone else, but without information linking the transaction to anyone. This is similar to the level of information released by stock exchanges, where the time and size of individual trades, the "tape", is made public, but without telling who the parties were.
传统的造币厂模型为交易的参与者提供了一定程度的隐私保护，因为试图向可信任的第三方索取交易信息是严格受限的。但是如果将交易信息向全网进行广播，就意味着这样的方法失效了。但是隐私依然可以得到保护：将公钥保持为匿名。公众得知的信息仅仅是有某个人将一定数量的货币发所给了另外一个人，但是难以将该交易同特定的人联系在一起，也就是说，公众难以确信，这些人究竟是谁。这同股票交易所发布的信息是类似的，股票交易发生的时间、交易量是记录在案且可供查询的，但是交易双方的身份信息却不予透露。
As an additional firewall, a new key pair should be used for each transaction to keep them from being linked to a common owner. Some linking is still unavoidable with multi-input transactions, which necessarily reveal that their inputs were owned by the same owner. The risk is that if the owner of a key is revealed, linking could reveal other transactions that belonged to the same owner.
作为额外的预防措施，使用者可以让每次交易都生成一个新的地址，以确保这些交易不被追溯到一个共同的所有者。但是由于并行输入的存在，一定程度上的追溯还是不可避免的，因为并行输入表明这些货币都属于同一个所有者。此时的风险在于，如果某个人的某一个公钥被确认属于他，那么就可以追溯出此人的其它很多交易。
网友评论