Quote from: othe on March 28, 2015, 01:54:18 AM

Quote from: Joshuar on March 28, 2015, 01:40:17 AM

Quote from: toknormal on March 28, 2015, 01:37:39 AM

Quote from: vokain on March 28, 2015, 01:18:01 AM

Monero has view keys to allow transparency.

Thats the problem - not the solution.

Care to give your reasoning? No problems arise from Viewkeys, they provide a harmony of sorts between having anonymity and allowing transparency to those you wish.

No he can't because he's wrong as always and i've already proven it to him before, to make it short a snippet from MRL-0004.

Quote

i may quote MRL-0004:

Quote
6 Auditability for Compliance Purposes
Businesses using ring signatures and stealth addressing through Monero will have
the reasonable desire to comply with the corresponding local laws within their
jurisdictions. Typically, these laws require the business to prove ownership of their
own funds, and demonstrate where funds may have been sent. To prove ownership
of any unspent funds on the block chain, a Monero account holder may publish a
zero mix-in ring signature of their public key. Please be aware that a zero-mix-in
ring signature is just an ordinary digital signature. An auditor can then scan the
block chain for the presence of the output public key, and verify that the key image
produced from the zero mix-in ring signature has not yet been used on the block
chain. To protect the privacy of the business and its customers, the auditor should
then destroy the signature and the key image.

Thats just 1 method, another one is the viewkey for example.
There are methods to proof u made a certain payment etc - cryptography is one nice tool.

But we all know who won't understand this here.

If you take DRK for example, its an absolute nightmare for compliance, tax etc. - especially if you don't want to ruin your privacy and endanger third party users.

If you want compliance in DRK then just don't use anonymous transactions.

Just hearing about these viewkeys and a few issues I can see:

1. What if someone extorts your viewkey? Then your past transaction anonymity is broken?

2. your quote says 'To protect the privacy of the business and its customers, the auditor should then destroy the signature and the key image.'. So my privacy is dependent on an auditor destroying my key how is that secure at all?