[ANN] ChipMixer.com - Bitcoin mixer / Bitcoin tumbler - mixing reinvented

[TryNinja]

So, Electrum shows this message as invalid. But some other tools show it as valid. This was my answer to OP after he sent me the signed message so I could test it.

Hey man,

I did some testing here and apparently Electrum is showing the message as invalid. My bet is that this is happening due to the empty line at the bottom of the message (see there is a line between the address and the --- SIGNATURE ---) which it ignores or doesn't verify properly.

However, I tested in another tools and it was verified.

For example:
https://tools.qz.sg/ - shows as valid (with the empty space at the bottom): - REMOVED SCREENSHOT DUE TO OP'S LETTER -
https://reinproject.org/bitcoin-signature-tool/ - shows as valid (also with the empty space at the bottom): - REMOVED SCREENSHOT DUE TO OP'S LETTER -

(both websites were the top links when I googled "bitcoin verify signature message online").

Meanwhile, others I couldn't make it appear valid. (e.g: https://btc.coin.space/messages/verify).

I remember seeing something like this before. Is this because Electrum trims the last empty line (at the end of the message)?

[1714053539]

1714053539

[1714053539]

1714053539

[1714053539]

1714053539

[Gyrsur]

@chipmixer:
Did u take precautions after fixing ?
https://fossbytes.com/tor-project-fixing-ddos-vulnerable-bug-in-onion-sites/

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.

Access via Tor is working again. Thank you!

[moejoejay]

early day i got an mail from the chipmixer team

they solved my problem

thnx for the quick response

best regards

[Rahar02]

Everything ok on chipmixer.com? I got 502 Bad Gateway
or "this site can't be reached,  chipmixer.com took too long to respond"

[malevolent]

Clearnet site takes a while to load for me, but eventually it does load. Onion site takes less time to load.

[LoyceV]

WARNING: Viguistam's link above is not the real .com!

He's Nuked.

[Rahar02]

onion site not working all day   but clearnet link url=https://chip*ixer.co/]https://chipmixer.com/[/url works sometimes. Your site under a DDoS attack?

wait for another 100 years before try to fool people here, LoL
He tried to replace .com to 》》 .co

[moejoejay]

I remember seeing something like this before. Is this because Electrum trims the last empty line (at the end of the message)?

I think it has sth. to do with the circumstance that the different world from OS'es and programming languages are not following the same standards as it should be.


Like Windows isnt case sensitive but Unix is,  for example.


@Chipmixer:

May u think about it to avoid line feed or carriage return through an simple symbol like an asterisk (*) in ur receipt then ur on the safe side for all systems.


best regards

[jackg]

I remember seeing something like this before. Is this because Electrum trims the last empty line (at the end of the message)?

I think it has sth. to do with the circumstance that the different world from OS'es and programming languages are not following the same standards as it should be.


Like Windows isnt case sensitive but Unix is,  for example.


@Chipmixer:

May u think about it to avoid line feed or carriage return through an simple symbol like an asterisk (*) in ur receipt then ur on the safe side for all systems.


best regards

Windows has CR+LR, Linux just has LR so the cr shows up as ^Z, open a bug report with electrum if you think they didn't just not copy the final return (it's better that way).


@Rahar02 can you delete that link just in case a search engine crawler picks it up and boosts it in the page rank.

[notblox1]

Is there any way coinmixer will support Ethereum in near future,
or maybe you know some alternative website that offers ETH coin mixing?

[moejoejay]

Windows has CR+LR, Linux just has LR so the cr shows up as ^Z, open a bug report with electrum if you think they didn't just not copy the final return (it's better that way).

this is only the Electrum Interface what about the others Verify Services in the web

but i agree with u thats not chipmixers fault

despite these may they can improve this with an minor change  

best regards

[LoyceV]

what about the others Verify Services in the web

You're compromising your privacy if you use those to verify a signed message.

[moejoejay]

You're compromising your privacy if you use those to verify a signed message.

i wont go so far

u can also use some as an offline version

ps: the most service which offers an receipt trim these automatically

best regards

[moejoejay]

From the ChipmixerFAQ:

If you sweep funds from chip in first 12h after your input, you receive same privacy as you would get from standard mixer. If you trust us (as you already did when you sent coins into mixer) and spend chip when you need it, then you achive maximum privacy you can get.

instead of leave the private key untouched ( not sweeping) to use the Voucher Code before an wait for several days to redeem or are these two things diferrent and not comparable related to increase the grade of privacy.

best regards   

[LoyceV]

instead of leave the private key untouched ( not sweeping) to use the Voucher Code before an wait for several days to redeem or are these two things diferrent and not comparable related to increase the grade of privacy.

It's different, but I think the very existence of both options increases your privacy. I'll give an example:
Sweep
1a. You deposit now, and get a private key that was created a day ago.
You wait a week, and sweep the private key. That means any external party can see the funds were moved after 8 days.

1b. You deposit now, and get a private key that was created a week ago.
You wait a day, and sweep the private key. That means any external party can see the funds were moved after 8 days.

To the curious outsider, 1a and 1b look exactly the same! If he wants to find your deposit, it could just as well have been a day ago as it could have been a week ago. Or much longer, as you could have stored a voucher for months!

Voucher
2. You deposit now, and get a voucher. When you redeem the voucher, you continue at for example 1a or 1b, and once you sweep the private key, anyone can only see how long ago the address was funded. They can't know if you deposited days, weeks or months earlier, which makes it very difficult to link your deposit to your withdrawal.

[moejoejay]

Is there any way coinmixer will support Ethereum in near future,
or maybe you know some alternative website that offers ETH coin mixing?

There some approaches like this:

https://bitcoinmix.org/de/eth

https://tornado.cash/


But im not sure if its battle tested for the masses.

so be careful

Adittional: Some Technical Paper: https://eprint.iacr.org/2019/341.pdf


best regards

[moejoejay]

@LoyceV:

So the voucher step is the game changer to increase the privacy in an significant way in this case  ?


best regards

[LoyceV]

So the voucher step is the game changer to increase the privacy in an significant way in this case  ?

It's part of the total package. You could also do this:
1. Deposit amount A now, and get a voucher
2. Deposit amount B next month, and get a voucher
3. Redeem both vouchers in December, get a private key for part of the funds, and get another voucher for later use.

That makes it very unlikely anyone can ever link any of the inputs through chain analysis.

[moejoejay]

@LoyceV:

Even if i sweeping the part of the funds in December in my Wallet ? Is there any connection to the past ? no or ?  

3. Redeem both vouchers in December, get a private key for part of the funds, and get another voucher for later use.

How many Funds has to be left for the new Voucher for later use  to keep privacy , i think u has to make input and output amount unequal in some way hasnt it  ? but how big has the difference be to gain ( keep) privacy  ?  

best regards  

[LoyceV]

Even if i sweeping the part of the funds in December in my Wallet ? Is there any connection to the past ? no or ?

There are probably many potential connections if someone would search for data on the blockchain. But it won't be possible to know for sure which transactions are connected, and if there are enough possibilities, I don't think you can still call it a connection. It will be a guessing game.

3. Redeem both vouchers in December, get a private key for part of the funds, and get another voucher for later use.

How many Funds has to be left for the new Voucher for later use  to keep privacy , i think u has to make input and output amount unequal in some way hasnt it  ? but how big has the difference be to gain ( keep) privacy  ?

I can't tell you how to divide funds, but instead of trying to take special care of the sizes, I'd say just don't make it predictable.