Bitcoin Forum

Wasabi Wallet is an open source, noncustodial desktop-based Bitcoin wallet that has developed taking into account privacy.
It was created by the company zkSANCKS, whose mission is to develop products that facilitate privacy improvements.
Being a complete cross-platform product, it has capabilities of working on any desktop architecture be it Windows, OSX or Linux.

Wasabi is an HD wallet and uses BIP84 derivation scheme giving it capabilities to generate only bech32 native segregated witness addresses.
The wallet is loaded with advanced coin control features and is also integrated with the Tor anonymity network, without which the coin is unable to function.  

By implementing BIP157–158, the wallet has been deployed as a light wallet that does not fail when put to network analysis test
and prevents spying and snooping carried out by harmful bots, hackers, and even companies.

The wallet complies with the ZeroLink wallet fungibility ecosystem that uses Chaumian CoinJoin,
a trustless Bitcoin mixing technique in which the coordinator of the mix is unable to steal the coins.
Such features help the wallet to enforce 100 anonymity set consistently, which means to perform a transaction,
a user will have to wait for 100 users to pool their Bitcoins and perform it as a batch.

Website:
https://www.wasabiwallet.io/

Beta download:
https://github.com/zkSNACKs/WalletWasabi

Article:
https://btcmanager.com/making-bitcoin-transactions-untraceable-with-the-wasabi-wallet/

I think that wallets with privacy feature are the future  ;)

This video explains more about this specific Wasaby Wallet
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zdRXVZ0IOu

Still waiting for compiled versions.
Current version is Wasabi v0.9.1: Beta Release 3

Wasabi v0.9.4: Beta Release 5 - OSX Support
https://github.com/zkSNACKs/WalletWasabi/releases/tag/v0.9.4

https://github.com/zkSNACKs/WalletWasabi/releases

Since i like testing out open source wallets, i cloned your github repo and i've built this wallet on a sandbox system.

I haven't vetted the code, so don't take this post as a vouch for this wallet! I just wanted to give you an opinion of the wallet running on my sandbox system. There are many positive points, but i decided to give some feedback on the things i'd personally change if it were my project. That way you might get some feedback that can help you in improving your project.

• build process: i must say i wasn't a fan of an open source wallet for which i needed to download .net's SDK on my linux box... I would have preferred a different language. However, i must say the build process ran smoothly. For my main system, i don't think i'll be downloading .net in order to run this wallet tough
• initialisation of the wallet: I'd personally prefer it if you forced the users to repeat the mnemonic words and their pass after the initialisation... That way you're more or less sure they did take some kind of backup (clear the clipboard between these steps so the user can't copy/paste the mnemonic)
• Overall look: a bit to dark for me, but that's my personal preference
• Coinjoin feature: i found it strange to see the minimum amount to register for a coinjoin session is 0.05007 BTC... I for one am not going to risk >$300 (in fiat) to take a testrun of this wallet
• Ease of use: i think anybody who has used a wallet in the past will be able to use this one...
• Wallet features: i'm missing coin controll features, multisig, signing of messages, export features (like the xpub or unsigned tx's), address controll, signing of unsigned transactions,...
• I also browsed your documentation, and did find how to setup a backend node on the testnet, however i could not find the configuration parameter i need to run the wallet itself on the testnet... I must admit i didn't read everything thoroughly... => ~/.walletwasabi/client/Config.json

All in all, without reviewing the codebase for backdoors or flaws in any other part of the code, i must say that it's a nice looking wallet with most of the basic features one would need... However, i think you'll have to work on adding additional features and lowering the minimum amount to enter a coinjoin sesssion. It might also be a good idear to let the user pick a different color scheme to make things a bit less dark.

whenever you want to build any project or run it, you have to have the programming language framework that it is using. in other words the dependency. if you try Electrum for instance you will have to install Python. in just happens that in some linux distros like Ubuntu it comes pre-installed.
the difference is Microsoft started .Net core recently and although multi platform projects are growing fast using .Net but it is not yet that popular for distros to include it with their releases.

---

it is good to see c# and also good to see Avalonia in action :D

Well, that's more or less what i meanth by my post (i might have worded it wrong, was a bit tired and english is not my native language)... That doesn't mean i'm comfortable installing the .net SDK on any non-sandbox machine. AFAIK, it's closed source, released by microsoft and it clearly states they can actually collect data and send it back to microsoft when you read the TOS...
I don't think it'll ever be included in popular linux distros because of these parameters (closed source, propriatary, data collection).

I know electrum needs python3, but i'm far more comfortable installing an open source python binary on my machines compared to some closed source microsoft framework that clearly tells you they'll probably be sending data back to microsoft.

But that's just my personal gut feeling... Everybody has to decide this for their own, and it has little to do with this wallet :)

i don't know what that ToS is about*. maybe it is like bug/crash report?!
but almost all of .Net framework has been open source for a while now. (it is what you use in windows) https://referencesource.microsoft.com/
and 100% of .Net Core (which you install on linux) has been open source and available on Github https://github.com/dotnet

* edited for clarity :P

ToS = Terms of Service.

Microsoft is not only collecting data when software is crashing.
They are always collecting data to 'enhance user experience'.

Everyone has to decide for himself whether he actually want's to be part of microsoft's data-collecting actions.




Being open source doesn't reduce the risk in using software developed by microsoft.

Microsoft seems to always produce more buggy and less secure software than anyone else (e.g. windows, bitlocker, ... ).

I, personally, wouldn't use a wallet which requires me to install .NET. Especially not a wallet which claims to be privacy orientated.

Something to think about.

It might be safer to leave them alone. Tumbling with Coinjoin and mixers might mix your coins with the coins of criminals, black hat hackers, and dark market drug dealers.

That min limit's been coming down, from 0.1 BTC I believe, as more users join, the smaller the denomination possible if I understand.

There is the assumption that anyone seeking privacy with coinjoin and mixers are criminals and drug dealers... maybe throw in terrorists, blackmailers and kidnappers. It's a wrong assumption, and seeking privacy does not amount to criminality... But you're really not eliminating that risk of mixing coins with undesirable activity if you also use, say exchanges, casinos or trade P2P.

I've done all of that so would be really surprised if none of my coins are thus tainted.

Besides, just because you don't mix don't prevent anyone from dusting you with dirty satoshi.

But think about it, tumblers and coinjoins are not cheap, and who would be willing to pay for them to keep their privacy?

I believe an ordinary user would be digging himself into a bigger hole if he mixes his coins with what usually would be the criminals' coins.

Unless you mined your coins yourself you likely already hold coins that are tainted in one way or another. Merely holding a couple of sats that are linked to illicit businesses won't implicate you in any crime unless law enforcement has additional reason to believe in your involvement. Same goes for using TOR, prepaid phones and other means of anonymization. Using these tools do not make you a criminal and do not build a case against you (unless you're involved in an illicit business to begin with, obviously).

In principal I get why tumblers have a bit of a bad rep, but in general I guess you could also see them as a bit of a workaround to "fix" Bitcoin's transparency. Bank account balances are not publicly accessible either, so why should Bitcoin balances be?

While coinjoins and tumblers are more work and require higher fees than regular Bitcoin transactions I wouldn't call them expensive either. Most Bitcoin ATMs and Localbitcoin traders charge higher fees than what coinjoins and tumblers entail.

That being said I fully agree that only few people are willing to pay for keeping their privacy. Heck, most people don't even bother rejecting 3rd party cookies when being presented with a GDPR prompt. That shouldn't prevent anyone from making privacy tools easily accessible though.

No they won't. But some exchanges, like Coinbase, will mark your account if your coins are tainted, and will sometimes freeze your account, and confiscate your coins.

Be careful if you believe you are safe because you tumbled your coins. They could be more tainted as a result.


It goes back to the debate. What kind of users have too much to hide that are incentivized to pay for tumbling, and why should I mix my coins with their coins?


What is the estimated, average fee to mix 1 Bitcoin?


Or people with something to hide.

One more reason to not use Coinbase then. Any exchange that goes beyond the necessities of KYC / AML should be avoided like the plague. If you get your account frozen on the likes of Coinbase you should have stuck with PayPal. Same difference, but without the extra steps of going through crypto.



Would you, personally, post your bank statements publicly on the internet?



Wasabi Wallet charges 0.003% per anonymity set which apparently comes down to 0.15% per transaction [1]. ChipMixer relies on donations and can thus be used to mix for free, but will keep any amount smaller than 0.001 BTC as donation [2]. Other options likely fall within similar fee ranges.

[1] https://www.reddit.com/r/Bitcoin/comments/9sziy5/privacy_wasabi_wallet_10_is_finally_released/e90mlvu/
[2] https://chipmixer.com/faq



Not being able to keep private from governments is a threat to democracy. Heck, to any free society that relies on a centralized, hierarchical government.

As is the thinking that only "people with something to hide" want privacy.

Remember East Germany. I don't even want to imagine what a modern day Stasi could do with modern technology and data at hand.

That was not the point of the debate, and not using an exchange is an insignificant a solution to the taint problem.


No, but neither would drug dealers, money launderers, scammers, or thieves.


How much in Bitcoin on average for tumblers?

Wasabi is 0.15 Bitcoins?


This is the point! In their search for privacy, they might be digging themselves into a deeper hole because they would be mixing their coins with "tainted dirty" coins.

Not using an exchange that is trigger happy in freezing accounts beyond what is legally required of them is a solution however.

There's plenty of alternatives that are not quite as restrictive while still sticking to global and local regulations -- even amongst centralized exchanges. Additionally using a centralized service as wallet is leading the concept of cryptocurrencies ad absurdum anyway.

I absolutely respect if an exchange freezes an account because they are subpoenaed to do so based on concrete suspicions by law enforcement. But if Coinbase starts getting PayPal on people's asses it's time to move out.



So does this make you a drug dealer, money launderer or thieve? It doesn't. And neither does wanting some privacy on public blockchains.



0.15% of 1 BTC is 0.0015 BTC :)

Most Bitcoin ATMs and Local Bitcoin sellers charge around 2% - 5%. Even Coinbase charges 1.49% [1] which is literally an order of magnitude more expensive.

[1] https://support.coinbase.com/customer/en/portal/articles/1826294-how-are-fees-applied-when-i-buy-or-sell-digital-currency-



As long as it's not their own "tainted" coins their privacy is prevailed. You can't be held accountable for crimes you didn't commit.

If you're worried about using privacy enhancing methods because it may make you look suspious, you might be already be living in an oppressive regime. The only antidote against privacy enhancing methods becoming suspicious, is privacy enhancing tools becoming the norm.

Keep in mind, only a couple decades back, secure internet connections where deemed technology that should not be available to the regular citizen -- because what would they have to hide? Nowadays a world without HTTPS would be unthinkable, with ecommerce and ebanking being an impossibility.

---

Anyway, it's hard to objectively discuss something that is mostly a matter of personal philosophy. Luckily Bitcoin and other cryptocurrencies offer possibilities to be as private or as transparent as personally preferred. Just remember that equating "privacy" with "crime" is not a slippery slope, but the ditch at the end of it.

But that does not solve the problem that we could be digging ourselves in a deeper hole when we taint our coins further through mixers, tumblers, and coinjoins.


But some exchanges might protect themselves by freezing your account, and confiscate your coins. People holding tainted coins are still at risk.


Then I will ask you this. Is it an impossible idea that NO CRIMINALS are using mixers, and coinjoins?

Believing that all coins going through them are "clean", would be stupid.

Of course not, and no one ever said that. But if applied correctly they make coins lose your taint (note: taint in the neutral sense of tracked coins, not in a criminal sense). And that's the one you want to get rid of.

Tumblers and coinjoins are important for both fungibility and privacy because they make the concept of taint pretty much useless. And you want the concept of taint to be pretty much useless, because otherwise you couldn't accept Bitcoin payments for fear of receiving tainted coins -- even if coins would look untainted to you, they could still look tainted to someone else. And a currency you can't accept is a currency you can't spend is a useless currency.

@All: Sorry for having derailed the thread, I hope you enjoy the show.

Chainalysis and traditional (centralized) mixers are united in one thing:

Hate Wasabi Wallet!

 ;D

I have used ChipMixer  (https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=1935098.msg49490820#msg49490820)yesterday. Still waiting for my "chips", admin is offline.

Another user is complaining on Privcoin's thread (https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=2164614.msg49480874#msg49480874). He is probably in worse situation, because PrivCoin's admin was last online almost 3 months ago.

I believe that I will eventually get my coins from ChipMixer, when admin decide to take care of his business, but I will never again use mixers. Switching to Wasabi Wallet completely.

How long would it typically take to use coinjoin anyway? From start to finish that would mean.

As I could see this hurting centralized mixers pretty badly, though only if the time spent mixing is close to comparable. Let me know!

Last time I gave it a whirl (a couple of weeks ago) it took about 3 hours in the best case and I gave up after 6 hours in the worst case. Maybe it's better now, but it seems like there's still a bit of a chicken-egg problem: The less people use it, the less convenient it is to use, the less likely people are to use it again. I think especially the relatively large minimum amount (compared to centralized mixers) makes it harder for people to join, leading to prolonged waiting times. I do hope this gets better in time and as awareness spreads.

Hm, yeah that's a pretty big problem -- though I do see the Catch 22 type issue here and that's not something which is good.

I think another issue with Wasabi is the issue of there being too high of a minimum for conjoin, which I think is around .099 (somewhere around $380 USD as of right now) That's going to price a good deal of people out of using this service, and that's pretty sad to see as it is a good service that could be used to bring privacy to so many. I don't know the reason behind this sort of minimum, I do hope that there is someone here that could shine some light on that.

There is no real need to mix small amounts. So setting a high minimum for coinjoin use is viable. I don't expect many users willing to mix 10$ or even less. The problem is with that this is a new wallet, still in test phase. No one can afford 300$ to loose (probably) in a wallet test.
Actually, the integration of coinjoin service within a wallet software is a greatest feature, helping the wallet to compete with other wallet softwares but also with blenders. May be setting a high minimum coinjoin amount for wasabi is a clever strategie towards mixers: if you have a small amount, just use any traditional mixer.  ;)
I expect this new wallet to get more attention from the crypto community. I really find it useful.

Why not?

a btc wallet with anonymous transactions and open source? is a must try but i will wait for a final version before downloading it...

It does not have anonymous transaction per se, but offers the option to use coinjoin, which results in anonymizing your coins (anonymity set = 100).

Most (if not all) open source wallets are work in progress.
The latest wasabi version is 1.1.6.
I don't know how you define 'final version', but 1.0 is release (no longer beta etc.).

https://twitter.com/zeroleak/status/1180482958194565122
Seems like misrepresentation to me. Stuff from coinjoins will always condense together in the end? Anonymity sets are gonna decay.
Why do they always shit-talk wasabi but not the others?

Hi.
I installed wasabi a few weeks ago. The implemented tor-feature was what it sold it to me.
I'm quite a noob in the bitcoin world and still trying out and learning a lot of stuff.
Can I ask two questions concerning wasabi wallet?
It says "new version available" in the lower left corner. Can I just install a new version and my wallet will be the same as before or is it a little more complicated?
What is new and does it make sense to update to the newer version?
Also, what would happen if I would "coinjoin" a coin that has been coinjoined before and shows a privacy level of 65 when mouse over?

Thanks, Dimitri

- usually wallets keep backward compatibility which means when you upgrade to a new version they can continue using the wallet you already had. it is however safer to always make and keep a backup of your wallet or seed.
- they don't keep a separate change log. there is only the release notes here: https://github.com/zkSNACKs/WalletWasabi/releases it is a good idea to upgrade, but you have to read what they changed to decide if it makes sense to do it and if it is mandatory (like fixing a bug) or not.

A more secure way to update your version would be to download from the official website, verify it and then install it. Each version is different so you might want to look at the update log. Most of the time, updating to the latest version is recommended (if there's any) because the app is considered more secure, has more features, etc.