Use same script type for change when sending. about walletwasabi HOT 6 CLOSED

The concept makes sense. First, let's see how it should work now. According to this test, it should alternate.

https://github.com/zkSNACKs/WalletWasabi/blob/master/WalletWasabi.Tests/UnitTests/KeyManagementTests.cs#L215

We could say it is quasi-random. So either it is or there is a bug in Wasabi.

Is it alternating for you?

from walletwasabi.

No, change scripts are not always taproot and even if that were the case 3 observations are not enough to assert anything.

from walletwasabi.

Which version of Wasabi are you using?

from walletwasabi.

Always using the same script type for change might have minor benefits, as, if change is later spent again, not going into WabiSabi coinjoin, but receiver of first tx is not a wallet supporting WabiSabi, it's harder to distinguish which was recipient address and which was change.

from walletwasabi.

The drawback is that one can't sync the same seed with another segwit or taproot only wallet. For example, spending on mobile.

Usually there's a privacy benefit to fuzzing the change but in the case of CJ spending it's easy to tell one get remixed and the other doesn't (unless sending to another WW). In the meantime there's a privacy gain if random or same script but there isn't if it's sending change always to taproot.

from walletwasabi.

The concept makes sense. First, let's see how it should work now. According to this test, it should alternate.

https://github.com/zkSNACKs/WalletWasabi/blob/master/WalletWasabi.Tests/UnitTests/KeyManagementTests.cs#L215

We could say it is quasi-random. So either it is or there is a bug in Wasabi.

Is it alternating for you?

Latest, I only checked 3 transfer as a sample all change went to taproot.

from walletwasabi.