There is a paradox surrounding the cryptocurrencies. Cryptos proves unalterable, stored on thousands of computers, of every Bitcoin transaction that has ever taken place. Many of the transactions recorded on this register are crimes: billions of dollars in stolen funds, smuggling contracts and paid ransoms sitting in plain sight, still obscured by unidentifiable Bitcoin addresses and, in many cases, money laundering tangles.
Suppose you are so foolish as to let people know you have a lot of Bitcoin with you and if an intruder imposes the keys on you, how do you track the stolen loops?
Professor Ross Anderson of the Computer Laboratory of the University of Cambridge perfectly summarizes the approach in this video.
In 2018, a group of researchers on computer security in Cambridge published an article that supports a new way of tracing "contaminated" coins in the blockchain, especially those that have been stolen or extracted from victims and then sent through a series of transactions. to hide their diseases. – rotten source Rather than trying to offer new investigative tricks to identify the source of a Bitcoin transaction that hides behind a pseudonym address, their idea redefines instead what constitutes a dirty bitcoin.
Based on a previous legal by a decision of the British court of 1816, they state that the first coin that leaves a Bitcoin address should be considered the same coin as the first one that entered it, bringing with it all the criminal history of that coin. And if this coin was stolen from someone once, it might be allowed to claim it even after passing multiple addresses.
The systems are known as "haircut" and "poison". For example, if three stolen coins are mixed with seven coins, according to the first method, 30% of the resulting coins would be dirty; and according to the second, 10 coins would be dirty. Following these two systems, then half of the transactions with bitcoin it should be considered dirty