An Analysis of Anonymity in Bitcoin Using P2P Network Traffic

By P. Koshy, Diana Koshy, Patrick Drew McDaniel. Financial Cryptography, 2014

435 citations recorded by the source corpus.

Subfields: Artificial Intelligence, Computer Networks and Communications

View Paper: https://www.semanticscholar.org/paper/c27762257f068fdbb2ad34e8f787d8af13fac7d1

How researchers see this paper

The researchers whose trusted networks rank it highest, strongest advocate first. Every researcher gets a different order.

In Artificial Intelligence

In Computer Networks and Communications

Citations in the corpus

CoinShuffle: Practical Decentralized Coin Mixing for Bitcoin (2014, background): “Koshy, Koshy, and McDaniel [11] show that it is possible to identify ownership relationships between Bitcoin addresses and IP addresses.”
Decentralization in Bitcoin and Ethereum Networks (2018, background): “Another study [49] deanonymized peers by observing anomalous relaying behavior in network.”
RingCT 2.0: A Compact Accumulator-Based (Linkable Ring Signature) Protocol for Blockchain Cryptocurrency Monero (2017, background): “For instance, there is a research that identifies ownership relationships between Bitcoin addresses and IP addresses [22].”
Bitcoin and Beyond: A Technical Survey on Decentralized Digital Currencies (2016, background): “The relay patterns identiﬁed by [Koshy et al. 2014] conﬁrm the expected behavior.”
Deanonymisation of Clients in Bitcoin P2P Network (2014, background): “Koshy et al. [11] managed to deanonymize 1162 addresses over the period of 5 months.”
Privacy-Preserving Solutions for Blockchain: Review and Challenges (2019, background): “• Blockchain P2P Network privacy: the blockchain nodes communicate with each other in a P2P overlay network over the Internet, therefore, making the users traceable through the network [11] via their IP addresses when they submit new transactions.”
An Empirical Analysis of Traceability in the Monero Blockchain (2017, background): “While Bitcoin, the ﬁrst and currently largest cryptocurrency, explicitly identiﬁes which coin in the transaction graph is being spent, Cryptonote allows users to obscure the transaction graph by including chaﬀ transaction inputs called “mixins” (this is visualized in Figure 1).”
Applications of Blockchains in the Internet of Things: A Comprehensive Survey (2019, background): “A privacy breach can also occur by drawing inferences based on graph analysis of the network of nodes a user transacts with [230], [231].”
Security and Privacy in Decentralized Energy Trading Through Multi-Signatures, Blockchain and Anonymous Messaging Streams (2018, methodology): “A8 Network analysis Attacker using behaviour-based clustering techniques could map addresses to profiles or transactions to addresses by tracing and analyse the network history of publicly announced transactions [17].”
Concurrency and Privacy with Payment-Channel Networks (2017, background): “As a matter of fact, while a plethora of academic papers have studied the privacy guarantees offered by current Bitcoin payments on the Bitcoin blockchain [21, 25, 45, 51, 52, 64, 66], there exists at present no rigorous analysis of the privacy guarantees offered by or desirable in PCNs.”
A Survey on Security and Privacy Issues of Bitcoin (2017, background): “Similar to work done in [114], Androulaki et al.”