Author: Damian Williamson 2018-01-13 02:11:08
Published on: 2018-01-13T02:11:08+00:00
The concept of “plausible deniability” has been questioned in the context of devices such as Trezor. The objective of plausible deniability is to present some acceptable (plausible) alternative while keeping the actual hidden (denied). However, this could backfire quite badly as it can be used as evidence against the user, causing them to risk everything. The term “plausible deniability” is viewed as a transparent excuse for explaining away an indisputable fact which arouses suspicion. It is not helpful in a legalistic scenario where authorities believe a user has more cryptocurrency than they are revealing, as they may be forced to sit in jail until they reveal the real password. Information does not exist in isolation, and it is important to have a privacy practice that leaves nobody knowing or suspecting that you have any Bitcoin at all. If a user is known or believed to own large amounts of BTC, a realistic bad guy’s response to their “decoy” wallet could be to keep beating them with rubber hose until they tell the *real* password. In addition, data obtained via the network could prove that a user has more cryptocurrency than they are revealing, tying their identity to their wallet in various ways.
Updated on: 2023-06-12T23:49:26.802715+00:00