Nihilist, since you’ve watched the video can you make another post on the “heuristics” the presenter was talking about? I think the community needs to know how exactly their automated tool discards decoys from the list of transactions to consider.
they discard the decoys when they’re given the transactions of interest, this lets them know that this transaction they saw on their node actually comes from that subphoenable entity (centralised exchange), from there they have the list of transactions that went through and they can rule out the dandelion decoys. but otherwise they can’t.
I also mentionned that they are looking at the fee structure on their malicious nodes, hence my recommendation to use the default fees. not sure if they’re actually using the rest. (number of inputs and outputs ?)
Nihilist, since you’ve watched the video can you make another post on the “heuristics” the presenter was talking about? I think the community needs to know how exactly their automated tool discards decoys from the list of transactions to consider.
they discard the decoys when they’re given the transactions of interest, this lets them know that this transaction they saw on their node actually comes from that subphoenable entity (centralised exchange), from there they have the list of transactions that went through and they can rule out the dandelion decoys. but otherwise they can’t.
I also mentionned that they are looking at the fee structure on their malicious nodes, hence my recommendation to use the default fees. not sure if they’re actually using the rest. (number of inputs and outputs ?)
Thanks