How can we easily view recent WabiSabi CoinJoins?

[OROBTC]

...

Creating a different thread so as not to clog up comments on nearby Wasabi threads.

Soon after Wasabi kicked off its new CoinJoin "Service", (witcher-sense, IIRC) showed us their first CJ in a post.

Is there an easy way to look at / find recent Wasabi v.2 CoinJoins?  I'd like to take a closer look at a few, maybe even try a small CJ myself there with some "well tainted" coins I already own just to see for myself what some limits might be ($ size of TX's, % "tainted", etc.).

I'm one of those learn by doing dudes, except for trying to learn programming...

Many thanks!

[BitMaxz]

I tried to install Wasabi v2.0 the wallet is totally different compared to before and it takes a few minutes after importing a wallet except on the wallet with more than 20 transactions it takes 30 minutes before you can able to use it(Which is very slow).

I tried to check settings or anywhere on the wallet but I can't seem to find where the Coinjoin button is located.



Only the design and discreet mode is only new to me without the Coinjoin button.

[witcher_sense]

Is there an easy way to look at / find recent Wasabi v.2 CoinJoins?  

You can use this filter to find Wasabi CoinJoins: https://blockchair.com/bitcoin/transactions?s=time(desc)&q=input_count(50..),output_count(58..),time(2022-06-26..),version(1)#f=hash,input_count,output_count,time,fee_usd,output_total,output_total_usd,version

You can also find all active rounds of CoinJoin transactions here: https://stats.wasabiwallet.io

Source: https://twitter.com/HillebrandMax

I'd like to take a closer look at a few, maybe even try a small CJ myself there with some "well tainted" coins I already own just to see for myself what some limits might be ($ size of TX's, % "tainted", etc.).

As far as I know, Wasabi hasn't yet started to censor incoming UTXOs: first they need to attract liquidity, which is why they postponed implementing surveillance mechanisms and are currently running a promotional campaign with signature ads and paid reviews.

[NotATether]

As far as I know, Wasabi hasn't yet started to censor incoming UTXOs: first they need to attract liquidity, which is why they postponed implementing surveillance mechanisms and are currently running a promotional campaign with signature ads and paid reviews.

It's not really for liquidity as it is the censoring mechanism not yet developed yet, as you mentioned. zkSNACKs can always simply bankroll that development anyway (and it may even be doing so right now).

Answer: What you are looking at is 1.0 documentation. 2.0 docs are still under construction. Blacklisting is still not implemented.

(emphasis mine)

[dkbit98]

Is there an easy way to look at / find recent Wasabi v.2 CoinJoins?

I think you can find statistic for Wasabi, and compare it with JoinMarket and Whirlpool on Bitcoinkpis website.
Wasabi is showing clear decline in transactions after releasing of v2 wallet, and I think JoinMarket is much better decentralized option, but it is a bit more complicated to use.


https://www.bitcoinkpis.com/privacy

I listened one good interview between Stephan Livera and Max Hillebrand who is working for ZKSnacks/Wasabi Wallet.
He didn't say what analytics company they will use for blacklisting, but he thinks that only coin with risk score 10 will be blacklisted, whatever that means.
Big difference compared to centralized exchanges is that Wasabi wallet coordinator (ZKSnacks) is NOT going to take custody over coins they refused for coinjoin.
You could still use all your other coins that had no risk score, switching different Tor identity without any issue, so it's not black and white issue.
I would suggest listening this interview to learn more about this issue:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NtLCL9ztEuQ

[Pmalek]

He didn't say what analytics company they will use for blacklisting, but he thinks that only coin with risk score 10 will be blacklisted, whatever that means.

I seriously doubt their mechanisms for determining this risk score will be public so that people can check some type of list and determine for themselves if the coins they have are considered tainted and dirty by ZKSnacks.

I wonder how they would rate bitcoin that comes from ChipMixer or our signature payments for that matter?

[OROBTC]

...

Nice link, witcher-sense!

Thanks to you all for shedding more light on Wasabi's new project.

Will there be any kind of advance notice before they BLACKLIST?

[witcher_sense]

...

Nice link, witcher-sense!

Thanks to you all for shedding more light on Wasabi's new project.

Will there be any kind of advance notice before they BLACKLIST?

Rumor has it that they abandoned, at least temporarily, their plans of collaborating with chain surveillance firms and adding filtering and blacklisting anti-features into CoinJoin rounds. Allegedly, their previous jurisdiction (Gibraltar) sent them a notice that they must comply with local regulations and that they must prevent any attempts of money laundering via their default coordinator. In case they can't or aren't willing to introduce AML mechanisms into their protocol, they must leave the jurisdiction and move somewhere else. It is said that they moved to another country of residence with less strict rules regarding money laundering, namely Seychelles, and that allows them to postpone blacklisting. I tried to find them here https://www.registry.gov.sc/BizRegistration/WebSearchBusiness.aspx but to no avail.

You can find more information here:

https://twitter.com/TheVladCostea/status/1548795330820538370

[BlackHatCoiner]

You can use this filter to find Wasabi CoinJoins

From what I see, it selects all the transactions after 26th of June, that have at least 50 inputs and 58 outputs. How do you know they're all CoinJoins? And how do you know that this filter contains all Wasabi's CoinJoins? Is it official that they don't make CoinJoins with less than 50 inputs and 58 outputs?

I seriously doubt their mechanisms for determining this risk score will be public so that people can check some type of list and determine for themselves if the coins they have are considered tainted and dirty by ZKSnacks.

Of course they aren't public, for if they were, we would all avoid them and make this "taint" thing further pointless.

[o_e_l_e_o]

It is said that they moved to another country of residence with less strict rules regarding money laundering, namely Seychelles, and that allows them to postpone blacklisting.

Postpone, or abandon? Because postponing achieves nothing. I don't care if they are going to censor me next week or next year - I'm never using any wallet or service which thinks that doing so is an acceptable price to pay.

Their legal documents from 2020 do indeed state Gibraltar: https://github.com/zkSNACKs/WalletWasabi/blob/master/WalletWasabi/Legal/Assets/LegalDocumentsWw1.txt
While the same document updated for 2022 says Seychelles: https://github.com/zkSNACKs/WalletWasabi/blob/master/WalletWasabi/Legal/Assets/LegalDocumentsWw2.txt

So it does seem they have moved jurisdiction already. So if that's the case, why haven't they come out and said they are not going to censor their users? And why even announce the censorship in the first place, given that it is yet to be implemented? They could just have moved jurisdictions without saying anything.

I don't believe they have any intentions on reversing their pro-censorship stance, but if they do then I must say they have the stupidest PR department in the world for letting this much fall out go on for so long over something they always planned not to do.

[Pmalek]

So it does seem they have moved jurisdiction already. So if that's the case, why haven't they come out and said they are not going to censor their users? And why even announce the censorship in the first place, given that it is yet to be implemented? They could just have moved jurisdictions without saying anything.

Maybe the original decision was to start censoring certain transactions for reasons unknown to us. And as things were progressing, someone suggested why don't we move our business to a jurisdiction where this nonsense doesn't have to be implemented at all? Even though they are claiming that no one was forcing them to implement the censorship, I am pretty sure something was going on or they were warned that it would happen in the future. How else can you explain the sudden jurisdiction change around the same time when the taint nonsense began?

[o_e_l_e_o]

-snip-

Well, I guess we'll have to wait and see what comes of it all. But I don't see what they have to lose from coming out now and saying "zkSNACKs is moving jurisdiction and will not be implementing blacklisting once the move is complete". If that is indeed their intention, then they will be announcing that eventually, so why not now? Gibraltar will somehow prevent them from leaving?

And even if for some reason they can't be that specific, then why not say "It is under review/consideration" or "We are exploring other options" rather than doubling down on it and trying to defend censorship as if it's a good thing, and calling the community a bunch of "whiners" for being outraged about it? As I said above, if this was their plan all along then they've gone about it in the stupidest way possible.

But this is now getting off topic here, so I'll end it there.

[witcher_sense]

From what I see, it selects all the transactions after 26th of June, that have at least 50 inputs and 58 outputs. How do you know they're all CoinJoins? And how do you know that this filter contains all Wasabi's CoinJoins? Is it official that they don't make CoinJoins with less than 50 inputs and 58 outputs?

The link to this filter was posted by zkSNACKs CEO Max Hillebrand here: https://twitter.com/HillebrandMax/status/1541501257386442753 He states that this is a "roughly accurate" filter for both 1.0 and 2.0 CoinJoins. I think that "roughly accurate" means that false positives or false negatives are possible. I haven't checked the source code of Wasabi Wallet 2.0 yet and don't know what the minimum input count is but from their Twitter you can find that they lowered this number from initial 150 to 100: https://twitter.com/wasabiwallet/status/1537695385925431296 or even less: https://twitter.com/HillebrandMax/status/1538025729786466305

Postpone, or abandon?

Abandon is a too strong word which implies responsibility for what is said or promised.

Also, I don't think they will give up on their plans to flirt with regulatory bodies to maximize desirable profit.

Stephan Livera:

Is this a regulatory capture play? So, as we see with the likes of the chain surveillance firms, they are trying to go out there, market themselves to governments and market themselves to exchange compliance teams saying, You need us to help—because they’ll market it like, Look, see, we’re keeping the crypto streets clean. When I think people who know better understand that a lot of the heuristics and this kind of tainting idea is oversold, as we’ve agreed. So is there an angle there that ZKSnacks is almost trying to get into the regulatory capture game to say, Look, see, we’re a regulatory-compliant CoinJoin, so therefore, Mr. Government or Mr. Regulator or Mr. Central Bank, please do not shut me down—or exchanges, please do not blacklist the coins coming out from me, ZKSnacks coordinator, you know?

Max Hillebrand:

Yeah. That’s certainly a desired outcome.