[Groxx]

Yeah, it's not a clear-cut connection if you do it in multiple steps. Hence the caveat that there are ways to make it (more) true. But what improvement in anonymity does it provide over leaving them separate? If they can't infer that X belongs to you, then if you don't send it to account Y (linked to you) you certainly don't leak that X belongs to you. If you do, it's not proof, but it certainly doesn't improve matters.

Don't take it to extremes - this can clearly be stretched to include running the whole process through mixers and back to a single address while improving anonymity. It doesn't say that. In principle, is combining addresses better for anonymity than not?

[sliverstorm]

I think what you're looking at is something more like, if someone employs this tactic, they can't identify that addresses X, Y, and Z belong to the same person, whether or not they know who that person is.

Linking together abstract pieces like that can be one of the first steps to figuring out a very anonymous network.

[Groxx]

I can't tell if you're agreeing with me or disagreeing...

And yes, those links are basically all you can use in an anonymous network to deanonymize actions. So how is linking things better than not?

[sliverstorm]

Now I think I'm just confused by the way you're describing things. I'll hope someone else is better able to understand.

[Groxx]

Hah, sorry if I am :) Not sure how I can significantly improve things without writing a blog post or something :|

Anyway. Thanks for chiming in :)