CISA for privacy is a very non trivial issue. As Chris Belcher always used to point out, the simple argument "coinjoins become cheaper with CISA, therefore CISA promotes cheaper privacy" is mostly just not true, because coinjoin promotes "A is paying B, C is paying D" to happen in one transaction instead of two, but that batched transaction doesn't *by default* offer any additional privacy, because they will not modify the structure (in particular the output amounts) in a way that obfuscates the transactions. Now there are definitely counterarguments but I think that's more true than false.
And whether you get into those counterarguments or not, either way, CISA is clearly a net positive in many senses, and *at the very least* shouldn't make privacy worse (in this, I am disagreeing with https://delvingbitcoin.org/t/cisa-and-privacy/824 for example; it seems most people there argree with me)
Still, let's not jump the gun. CISA doesn't yet exist unfortunately.
waxwing /
npub1va…knuu7
2024-05-17 17:26:26
in reply to nevent1q…ue8v
Author Public Key
npub1vadcfln4ugt2h9ruwsuwu5vu5am4xaka7pw6m7axy79aqyhp6u5q9knuu7Published at
2024-05-17 17:26:26Event JSON
{
"id": "f6fdfc16b47d110eb24f7b0507dbe2d7207f83b33aa80bf5ea63d3eadf505fb1",
"pubkey": "675b84fe75e216ab947c7438ee519ca7775376ddf05dadfba6278bd012e1d728",
"created_at": 1715966786,
"kind": 1,
"tags": [
[
"e",
"3d4e223dbd9b91e889d945ae13b1984fb22dffde76882574c7d918415c6fd9e2",
"",
"root"
],
[
"e",
"5de14d24b9bec0352b770723cb9b471e5ebe47d28f4a33837bfeb7afdcc15be4"
],
[
"e",
"defa882200274d16765b861c25c5ccafd2187d1d95afd24ad870556e031c102c",
"",
"reply"
],
[
"p",
"d8a6ecf0c396eaa8f79a4497fe9b77dc977633451f3ca5c634e208659116647b"
],
[
"r",
"https://delvingbitcoin.org/t/cisa-and-privacy/824"
]
],
"content": "CISA for privacy is a very non trivial issue. As Chris Belcher always used to point out, the simple argument \"coinjoins become cheaper with CISA, therefore CISA promotes cheaper privacy\" is mostly just not true, because coinjoin promotes \"A is paying B, C is paying D\" to happen in one transaction instead of two, but that batched transaction doesn't *by default* offer any additional privacy, because they will not modify the structure (in particular the output amounts) in a way that obfuscates the transactions. Now there are definitely counterarguments but I think that's more true than false.\n\nAnd whether you get into those counterarguments or not, either way, CISA is clearly a net positive in many senses, and *at the very least* shouldn't make privacy worse (in this, I am disagreeing with https://delvingbitcoin.org/t/cisa-and-privacy/824 for example; it seems most people there argree with me)\n\nStill, let's not jump the gun. CISA doesn't yet exist unfortunately.",
"sig": "e068040de2f0b3f52d08c33f79c53a8f9fa0977fce12c0ca8bb4babf16e962b67f5176f6f8f2ef9a51dcc0fce4271c5a80494bea06e9b5f7878f8475beb8a689"
}