Quote from: cypherdoc on February 21, 2015, 12:03:24 AM

Quote from: molecular on February 20, 2015, 11:37:47 PM

Quote from: cypherdoc on February 20, 2015, 11:24:08 PM

Quote from: molecular on February 19, 2015, 10:31:44 PM

Quote from: cypherdoc on February 19, 2015, 09:21:56 PM

molecular:

can the Trezor ppl see our balances and tx's while the Trezor is logged into myTrezor.com?

yes, unfortunately. At least they're not using your xpub key to transfer addresses to watch, so they don't know your future keys (except the 5 or so per account they scan ahead).

That's my biggest criticism with myTrezor and it's why I switched to electrum as soon as the development code had trezor working. It's not perfect with electrum, either, but better (I don't know exactly what, but they do some stuff to increase privacy towards server operators).

I went to the hassle of running my own electrum server (public, of course, so I can hide in the masses when broadcasting transactions). Feel free to use it (electrum.0x0000.de), I'm not logging anything or looking at the traffic in any way.

How could they overlook such an obvious privacy violation when designing the wallet? It should be a local client that broadcasts tx's out to the network.

The broadcast isn't the only privacy problem inherent to the client/server thin wallet design, watching for incoming money another one.

They didn't overlook it, they accepted it for lack of a good solution.

I have no problem with running a full node with s local client to maintain privac. That should've been an option.

Satoshilabs is not in the business of making wallet software. They just made myTrezor site as a preliminary solution until wallet devs implemented trezor support.

I think maybe you want trezor support in bitcoin-qt (or bitcoin core or what it's called)?

You could rather easily use "bitcoind + local electrum server + electrum"

Also: maybe multibit might be a solution? Not sure how far the trezor support is, though.