Bitcoin Forum
June 07, 2024, 06:30:41 PM *
News: Latest Bitcoin Core release: 27.0 [Torrent]
 
   Home   Help Search Login Register More  
Pages: [1]
  Print  
Author Topic: How much capital is typically used for launching mixers/tumblers?  (Read 898 times)
DuddlyDoRight (OP)
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Activity: 318
Merit: 260



View Profile WWW
April 08, 2016, 04:52:57 PM
 #1

I wrote a secure tumbler(hardware isolation for priv. keys on back-end and PDO on a sqllite3 DB with PGP sig given to end-user and simplehttpserver) in python(I have no intention on using it though) and was wondering how people who do these typically handle early transactions? I don't see end-users waiting for other users before they get there coins back so this means the operator has to put in to cover, right? Doesn't this make early users identifiable?

I have faith that one day this forum will get threads where people won't just repeat their previous posts or what others have already stated in the same thread. Also that people will stop acting like BTC is toy-money and start holding vendors accountable. Naive? Maybe.
Hazelnutter
Member
**
Offline Offline

Activity: 70
Merit: 10


View Profile WWW
April 09, 2016, 05:05:04 PM
 #2

It really depends on how many users you have coming in, what you could do is just start with a few BTC then maybe create a changing limit on the maximum amount allowed to be mixed based on how much you have in storage.

❰❰ OPHION ❱❱▨▨▨▨▨▨▨▨▨▨▨▨▨▨▨ A SECURE, ANONYMOUS & DECENTRALIZED MARKET ▨▨▨▨▨▨▨▨▨▨▨▨▨▨▨❰❰ OPHION ❱❱
TRADE GOODS OR SERVICES ■NO LOGGING - AT ALL■ 2 OF 3 MULTISIG AUTOMATION ■SELLER/BUYER RATING SYSTEM■ AND MANY MORE
❰❰▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬❰❰ JOIN THE CROWDSALE ❱❱▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬❱❱
DuddlyDoRight (OP)
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Activity: 318
Merit: 260



View Profile WWW
April 10, 2016, 01:38:38 AM
 #3

It really depends on how many users you have coming in, what you could do is just start with a few BTC then maybe create a changing limit on the maximum amount allowed to be mixed based on how much you have in storage.

Another way is extending timers based on input-performance. This both covers end-user forward-payments and obfuscates the blockchain. As long as other users eventually come in. The only catch is early-users with big exchanges may get mad they have to wait days or weeks while you market the system.

I have faith that one day this forum will get threads where people won't just repeat their previous posts or what others have already stated in the same thread. Also that people will stop acting like BTC is toy-money and start holding vendors accountable. Naive? Maybe.
Hazelnutter
Member
**
Offline Offline

Activity: 70
Merit: 10


View Profile WWW
April 10, 2016, 04:15:13 PM
 #4

It really depends on how many users you have coming in, what you could do is just start with a few BTC then maybe create a changing limit on the maximum amount allowed to be mixed based on how much you have in storage.

Another way is extending timers based on input-performance. This both covers end-user forward-payments and obfuscates the blockchain. As long as other users eventually come in. The only catch is early-users with big exchanges may get mad they have to wait days or weeks while you market the system.

If I were you I'd make sure to avoid doing that, keeping a limit on the mixer at start would be better so people don't have to wait days. Because you may have a large issue on your hands once someone has to wait weeks to get their coins mixed.

❰❰ OPHION ❱❱▨▨▨▨▨▨▨▨▨▨▨▨▨▨▨ A SECURE, ANONYMOUS & DECENTRALIZED MARKET ▨▨▨▨▨▨▨▨▨▨▨▨▨▨▨❰❰ OPHION ❱❱
TRADE GOODS OR SERVICES ■NO LOGGING - AT ALL■ 2 OF 3 MULTISIG AUTOMATION ■SELLER/BUYER RATING SYSTEM■ AND MANY MORE
❰❰▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬❰❰ JOIN THE CROWDSALE ❱❱▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬❱❱
DuddlyDoRight (OP)
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Activity: 318
Merit: 260



View Profile WWW
April 10, 2016, 06:46:00 PM
 #5

It really depends on how many users you have coming in, what you could do is just start with a few BTC then maybe create a changing limit on the maximum amount allowed to be mixed based on how much you have in storage.

Another way is extending timers based on input-performance. This both covers end-user forward-payments and obfuscates the blockchain. As long as other users eventually come in. The only catch is early-users with big exchanges may get mad they have to wait days or weeks while you market the system.

If I were you I'd make sure to avoid doing that, keeping a limit on the mixer at start would be better so people don't have to wait days. Because you may have a large issue on your hands once someone has to wait weeks to get their coins mixed.

The only downside to that model is that big-exchange user can only forward/mix as much as the owner or early users put in. There is also currency lost  do to overhead from distributing inputs to split wallets used for forwards, and do to how fees work designing around this is annoying.

I have faith that one day this forum will get threads where people won't just repeat their previous posts or what others have already stated in the same thread. Also that people will stop acting like BTC is toy-money and start holding vendors accountable. Naive? Maybe.
Enzyme
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Activity: 420
Merit: 250


View Profile
April 11, 2016, 02:18:42 PM
 #6

People generally won't utilize new mixers unless they're decentralized. There are simply to many trusted options around.

Anyway, you'd need a large capital to account for the rich.
DuddlyDoRight (OP)
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Activity: 318
Merit: 260



View Profile WWW
April 11, 2016, 08:50:32 PM
 #7

People generally won't utilize new mixers unless they're decentralized. There are simply to many trusted options around.

Anyway, you'd need a large capital to account for the rich.

There isn't such thing as decentralized where all the infrastructure and trust is under one owner(s) which is the case with all I've seen. Multiple trusted parties makes corruption easier. Both increase attack surface and cost-overhead which would be passed on to users.

I also have high-doubts most tumblers to date actually covered in the beginning. I even remember some with a lot of users having trouble with rollover.

Bitmixer.io, BitLaunder.com, Coinmixer.net aren't decentralized and the only obfuscation they have is internal input tagging; all considered the top mixers. Mine does second-level splitting of inputs before it even uses them for mixing and has PCIe hardware isolation of private keys.

There was one mixer once that did what I do but didn't have hardware isolation. I think they were killed by rollover. I forget the name.

I have faith that one day this forum will get threads where people won't just repeat their previous posts or what others have already stated in the same thread. Also that people will stop acting like BTC is toy-money and start holding vendors accountable. Naive? Maybe.
Pages: [1]
  Print  
 
Jump to:  

Powered by MySQL Powered by PHP Powered by SMF 1.1.19 | SMF © 2006-2009, Simple Machines Valid XHTML 1.0! Valid CSS!