Thank you @simin, for your time and effort in this paper, based on my understanding of this research paper, I think this the paper tries to demonstrated the lack of users’ knowledge about blockchain privacy issues and even most users do not even know why privacy techniques are required or how they could mitigate de-anonymization. Based on these facts, I think that is why the author was able to find out that 18% of users were unaware of the risk of being de-anonymized on blockchain, and half of them knew about the risks and were concerned, I am sure that improving the users’ knowledge, the usability of implemented privacy techniques has a significant role in their practical adoption.
I think the paper did not investigate privacy wallets and users’ preferences on additional fees and delays related to add-on privacy techniques. I also noticed that the author complied with the GDPR by not asking any questions that may disclose personally identifiable information. In my opinion, I feel that it is necessary to know that several risk management strategies can be developed when considering blockchain technology:
• Use permissioned blockchain to support governance models:
• Authorize selected number of approved participants.
• Technical measures to reduce the amount of personal data that participants process.
• Allocating data processing responsibly.
• Responding to individual requests.
• Deploying data processing agreement.
• View differences between public and private blockchain implementation.
I just have few questions; do you think that there are Limit personal data stored in the blockchain? Do you also feel that CoinJoin-based methods might require less exchanges, which would bring down the charges that ought to be paid to give protection or privacy?