Not So Anonymous: Bitcoin Exchange Mt. Gox Tightens Identity Requirement(forbes.com)
forbes.com
Not So Anonymous: Bitcoin Exchange Mt. Gox Tightens Identity Requirement
http://www.forbes.com/sites/andygreenberg/2013/05/30/not-so-anonymous-bitcoin-exchange-mt-gox-tightens-identity-requirement/
8 comments
Bitcoin itself can be used anonymously if one is careful. However, there should never had been any expectation of anonymity when exchanging for another currency that is not anonymous, like a USD bank transfer.
Much like Tor; the weakest link is when you enter or exit.
The entry to Tor is never really an issue, at that point the data is several layers of encryption deep. You are right in that exits are a problem though, unless the target is a a hidden service.
Exit nodes aren't really a problem either, if you realize that Tor's purpose is to protect your anonymity. An exit node may see your traffic, but can't see where it comes from, thus protecting your anonymity. If you need confidentiality in addition, you need to use tools designed for that (such as SSL).
I've always found that interesting. Sometimes you look at a dollar and think "where has this been?" - with bitcoin you can answer that question as far back as "who created this money" (to various degrees of pleasure or dismay.)
In most cases the question makes no sense, as bitcoins do not have identity.
But a bitcoin is completely abstract. It hasn't been anywhere, the way a dollar has.
bitcoin laundering / zerocoin solve that.
Can zerocoin actually be used at this point? Last I heard it wasn't anything more than a proposal yet.
Then you are placing trust on the laundary on not selling you out.
Exactly. All a government would need to do is set up a laundry service with the lowest fees and they would be able to track and map a lot of juicy bitcoin usage.
start your own laundry. use several laundries.
or stealing your bitcoins
This is not really a surprise. If MtGox expects to survive as a business (if it can at all), then it will need to start tightening up the rules or else it will suffer the fate of not following regulation.
After the big Mt. Gox hack in 2011, in order to get my funds out, I had to send a photocopy of my ID to be verified (pretty sure there were other mechanisms, but that one seemed the one with the least friction). I'm a bit surprised that there's any expectation of anonymity with Bitcoin if you're not 100% non-fiat.
I think every journalist willing to write about bitcoin should know by now that mtgox security or anonymity issues has nothing to do with Bitcoin (I mean who is at Forbes and doesn't do his homework ?). This is another article that proves Forbes is clearly lobbying against Bitcoin.
Bitcoin is intended to be an anonymous decentralized solution for buying and selling stuff, you shouldn't be exchanging it for fiat money in the first place, but if you want to do so, of course you can, but then that's your own problem, not bitcoin's.
Forbes clearly doesn't want bitcoin to make it. They are saying it loud and clear by writing misleading articles.
Bitcoin is intended to be an anonymous decentralized solution for buying and selling stuff, you shouldn't be exchanging it for fiat money in the first place, but if you want to do so, of course you can, but then that's your own problem, not bitcoin's.
Forbes clearly doesn't want bitcoin to make it. They are saying it loud and clear by writing misleading articles.
I wonder what fraction of (1) the trade traffic, and (2) Bitcoin asset ownership cares deeply about the anonymity aspect of bitcoin.
As a corollary, I wonder what fraction of each would stop using bitcoin as a result.
As a corollary, I wonder what fraction of each would stop using bitcoin as a result.
I think those that use Mt Gox aren't so concerned with anonymity. They've had some level of verification for a couple of years.
For those that are concerned with it, they use other means.
For those that are concerned with it, they use other means.
Sending an identity card (including social security number), proof or residence, and lots of personal details was not enough yet? Didn't have to do any of this on Bitcoin-central, that's why I don't use gox anymore.
There's still no substitute for cash when you need true anonymity. How long till cash is made illegal?
Large amounts of cash are already either non-anonymous or illegal in most of western world - i.e., prove and record your identity along the cash deal, or else.
When governments adopt electronic currency.
Sigh. MtGox != Bitcoin. It's so painful to the community and cause to perpetuate this sad meme. I for one welcome whatever might make MtGox more reliable until someone else competent comes along.
I'm sure the other exchanges will soon follow suit. Since MtGox is responsible most of the bitcoin trades it might as well be Bitcoin.
Even if MtGox handled 100% of USD-BTC trades, it is still not Bitcoin. Many more transactions are happening on Blockchain that has nothing to do with MtGox or any other currency exchange.
The most interesting news today was the interview by American Banker with the head of FinCen. The questions are pretty probing, and they get some interesting answers.
http://www.americanbanker.com/issues/178_104/fincen-chief-q-...