Relation between self-sending and accounts

[rbrunner7]

You have the following statement in your "writeup", under the heading "self-sending", about self-sending within the same account:

This process doesn't break any link between the source and the destination, as both are part of the same account. Essentially, if you're sending Monero from address A to address B within the same account, then you're not obfuscating the flow of funds at all.

I don't believe this is true. If I am wrong this may be something that was overlooked so far and urgently needs closer investigation.

Can you please elaborate what issue you see here?

[antichainalysis]

I have reworded this for more clarity, please re-read https://github.com/antichainalysis/xmr-churner/blob/main/writeup.md#self-sending

The whole point of Monero churning is when you receive Monero from an exchange/identifiable source that reports to CA and/or IRS. I completely agree with people who say that normal Monero users shouldn't participate in churning.

In addition to the writeup, I will be adding more information soon. That is not the end of the writeup. I plan to explain a whole lot more, for example - TTPs of how Chainalysis and IRS trace Monero.

[rbrunner7]

Thanks for the rewording.

Unfortunately I stil cannot follow you. You write, regarding a self-send that stays within a single account:

It simply moves the funds around internally without adding any further privacy protection

I don't understand what exactly you mean with "moves ... around internally". I really don't think that's true. A wallet cannot "move something around internally". Any move has to go through the blockchain, even a self-send within a single account.

[antichainalysis]

Thanks for the rewording.

Unfortunately I stil cannot follow you. You write, regarding a self-send that stays within a single account:

It simply moves the funds around internally without adding any further privacy protection

I don't understand what exactly you mean with "moves ... around internally". I really don't think that's true. A wallet cannot "move something around internally". Any move has to go through the blockchain, even a self-send within a single account.

You're correct, what I mean is that from the perspective of the wallet owner the funds are being moved between addresses that they control under the same account.

For external observers, the transaction appears as private and unlinkable as any other Monero transaction. However, for the wallet owner, the relationship between the source and destination remains fully traceable. Additionally, if the funds originate from a traceable source (e.g., an exchange), a self-send does not disrupt the chain of custody or add meaningful privacy, as the exchange TXID can still be linked to the wallet.

[jeffro256]

Additionally, if the funds originate from a traceable source (e.g., an exchange), a self-send does not disrupt the chain of custody or add meaningful privacy, as the exchange TXID can still be linked to the wallet.

This is false. A self-send absolutely does add meaningful privacy, especially where a churn prevents an EAE scenario. Also, even though this doesn't "disrupt the chain of custody", it appears as if it does, which is as good as the XMR actually changing hands in some threat models.

[antichainalysis]

Additionally, if the funds originate from a traceable source (e.g., an exchange), a self-send does not disrupt the chain of custody or add meaningful privacy, as the exchange TXID can still be linked to the wallet.

This is false. A self-send absolutely does add meaningful privacy, especially where a churn prevents an EAE scenario. Also, even though this doesn't "disrupt the chain of custody", it appears as if it does, which is as good as the XMR actually changing hands in some threat models.

Sure, it can add "meaningful" privacy of self-sending to SOME extent. It can provide a layer of visual noise, especially when it's part of a larger churning process. It can help deter basic EAE attacks by making it appear that funds have changed hands, even when they haven't. But self-sending on it's own way is not sufficient for complete privacy, especially when it comes to funds originating from exchanges etc.

So, while self-sending can obfuscate funds visually, it doesn't fully break the chain of custody. That is why moneroc was made. self-sending alone doesn't completely sever that link. Chainalysis can do a lot of things, EAE attack is not their only arsenal.