# "address poisoning" — X 热门讨论 (2026-09-27 16:22 UTC)
## @0xZephh (Zeph) · 09-27 13:58 · ♥122 ↻2 💬40 Crypto payments could be a lot simpler.
@Americanfort_io is working on that from the payment layer itself.
With Send-to-Name™, you can use a FortressName instead of sharing a long wallet address.
Each payment gets a fresh one-time address, so your name doesn’t become a permanent link to your wallet activity.
That also means:
- less room for copy-paste mistakes and address poisoning - no fixed public wallet attached to your name - one FortressName across 13 integrated networks
And the payment still settles on the blockchain like a normal transaction.
I like the direction because it focuses on something people actually do every day: sending and receiving crypto.
Make the payment easier, keep the financial details more private, and let the infrastructure handle the complicated part.
That’s how crypto UX should feel. https://x.com/0xZephh/status/2104209029736313000
## @Defi_Zyrox (𝗭𝘆𝗿𝗼𝘅) · 09-27 13:22 · ♥48 ↻2 💬3 Sending crypto should be simple, but wallet addresses still make it way harder than it needs to be.
Long addresses are easy to copy wrong, and issues like address poisoning make the process even more stressful.
That’s what I find interesting about @Americanfort_io and its Send-to-Name™ feature.
Instead of sending to a long wallet address, you can use a readable FortressName, while a new one-time address is created for each payment.
Your name doesn’t point to one permanent wallet or publicly expose your full payment history either.
Even better, the same FortressName can work across 13 integrated networks while payments still settle directly onchain.
For me, this is a much cleaner way to make crypto payments easier without turning your activity into one permanent public profile.
You can claim a free FortressName here: https://t.co/O22r5uJd7n https://x.com/Defi_Zyrox/status/2104200069004280142