This is true unless we implement off-chain cryptography ie. blinded bearer certs. If we do - you can prove unlinkability without checking our code.

Or they may be scared of being linked with "money laundering". There are still some people that using https or VPN is "hacking".

We have contacted nullius about developing Chaumian bank.

Hello

After investigation we have discovered that session awarded with chips was started 5 hours after deposit transaction. While destroying session ends our contract responsibility and funds were already used by other (lucky) user - we award you full value voucher for 178 mBTC.

ProtonMail is not required. Any email will do.
No PGP encryption required. Plain text will do.

Thank you. This is more than anyone would expect you to do.

DDOS attack is over. Service is online.
DDOS is back. Service is disrupted.

There is no fix yet  https://trac.torproject.org/projects/tor/ticket/29607

Tor project have plan what should be fixed, idea how to do that and vague idea how exactly to do that. Issue is 7 months old - it will not be ready this year.

You've received answer for your email.

All support emails are answered. If you didn't get response, please send us another email or private message in forum.

We're still under heavy DDOS. We're working on it.


I can't find your email and your private message was sent few minutes before your post without any details. Please send us another email and PM with your deposit address or session token.

Letter of Guarantee works because:
- deposit address is public
- withdrawal address(es) is public
- transactions (deposit, withdrawal) are public
- all data is known beforehand and can be signed

If mixer does not send withdrawal transaction - user publishes LoG and everybody can verify:
- signature is correct
- deposit was made
- withdrawal was incorrect


With your proposal ChipMixer signs letter that contains address. User say they did not receive chips. They publish signed letter that address is ChipMixer address. ChipMixer says they released chips. Who is lying? Nobody knows - only known thing is that it was ChipMixer address and funds were deposited. User cannot prove they did not receive chips. ChipMixer cannot prove they released chips. What kind of guarantee is that?

Second letter - signed private keys - does not do anything for guarantee. If user received chips - they would not show second letter. If they did and ChipMixer show second letter - ChipMixer can sign anything they want - it does not prove anything.

Our Tor service is under DOS attack. We are working to resolve this issue.
All existing sessions will be extended for another 7 days.

It is same bug. All cases were solved by support but bug is still there.

Our site is hosted on Tor and only additionaly on clearweb.
Clearweb site allows clearnet users to get some privacy. We suggest all to use Tor.

Should we advertise that unrelated .com or keep it secret? How does it make mixes private?

For transparency reason - there is a scam accusation against ChipMixer active:
https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=5173144.msg52085359#msg52085359

Yuri Jhonny is correct. He visited our service, deposited BTC to our deposit address and our service did not give him chips nor vouchers. We are sorry for that. He received his chips after support intervention.

We are investigating what went wrong. We will update this post.

Yes. Each time ChipMixer is out of chips is due to more deposits than produced chips.

Chip creation is not directly affected by demand. If it was and same size chips were created when same size are withdrawn - it would be trackable on-chain and less private.

We do believe that ChipMixer is most transparent mixer. We provide information how our mixing work and most important - why.

Hello

Chips have been refilled. You can redeem your vouchers now.

To clarify simudrone situation

simudrone deposits A+B mBTC -  receives A mBTC chip and B mBTC chip
he withdraws both chips - receives both private keys (funded) but sweeps one of them (B)
he sends angry email to return his BTC to his address - provides address C

support check his session
- sweeping transaction is already confirmed
- one chip (A) is not sweeped
support sweeps chip A to address C
support writes email explaining what happened, why chip A was not sweeped and that chip A was manually sweeped to customers address C

simudrone claims he never wanted it and that address C is not his

Quick update for those who encountered maintenance mode

1. Maintenance is over and everything works except
2. Sweeping is still broken and maintenance did not help. Please use private keys yourself (as we always encourage) instead of sweeping with website for now.

4 @ 0.06

Today upon creation of chips, one transaction got delayed because mempool grew up quickly. It left our transaction with much lower fees than others and all new transactions had higher and higher fees.

We have bumped the fee for it and it is confirmed now. Please check your wallet. Private keys are already imported so Electrum should notice confirmation. If that's not a case, try to recover session using session token and reimport keys.

If you still have a problem, please contact us by email and provide deposit address and/or session token, we will help.

2 @ 0.1

7 @ 0.04