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

[Thirdspace]

This voucher is invalid or already redeemed. - I tried earlier, the key begins with the letter K and it does not work as a voucher. also it is not activated in electrum. I wrote to the mail indicated on the site, I am waiting for the third day, there is no answer

if it's a private key then it should come in pair with its bitcoin address (at step 3 or signed receipt)
can you check that address on block explorer?
if it is indeed unfunded (never funded) then there was a glitch on ChipMixer system
and I'm pretty sure ChipMixer will rectify it either by funding or replacing it, just have to be patient

[AdolfinWolf]

Is anyone else getting errors about the HTTPS certificate being invalid?



That's... slightly worrying?

Has no one encountered this yet? Seems like it expired two days ago..?

[jackg]

Is anyone else getting errors about the HTTPS certificate being invalid?



That's... slightly worrying?

Yea it is, has anyone checked the tor one? I’ll do it in a few minutes if my laptop will connect.

[AdolfinWolf]

Yea it is, has anyone checked the tor one? I’ll do it in a few minutes if my laptop will connect.

I don't think tor (.onion domains) relies on HTTPs certificates, as they're encrypted by default? so that's probably not affected. Guess i'll use the tor version for now.

Although;

As of August 2016, 13 onion domains are https signed across 7 different organisations via DigiCert.[23]

But as far as i understand it, it's rather useless.

[jackg]

Yea it is, has anyone checked the tor one? I’ll do it in a few minutes if my laptop will connect.

I don't think tor (.onion domains) relies on HTTPs certificates, as they're encrypted by default? so that's probably not affected. Guess i'll use the tor version for now.

Although;

As of August 2016, 13 onion domains are https signed across 7 different organisations via DigiCert.[23]

But as far as i understand it, it's rather useless.

Yes tor nodes have their own encryption as that's how tor works .
But maybe I'm wrong.

Edit: connection via tor remains as strong as normal (according to my browser at least).

I'd advise against using the dot com via the tor network and just using the dot onion until this problem is resolved. If you can only use it via the clearnet site then I'd suggest using a competitor or wait if you can (only if you can't access tor though).

[xdeath223]

This voucher is invalid or already redeemed. - I tried earlier, the key begins with the letter K and it does not work as a voucher. also it is not activated in electrum. I wrote to the mail indicated on the site, I am waiting for the third day, there is no answer

if it's a private key then it should come in pair with its bitcoin address (at step 3 or signed receipt)
can you check that address on block explorer?
if it is indeed unfunded (never funded) then there was a glitch on ChipMixer system
and I'm pretty sure ChipMixer will rectify it either by funding or replacing it, just have to be patient

the session was closed before I found the invalid key. copied, closed and left, only then I saw that the expensive key does not work

[operator55]

I wouldnt trust this mixer.
If they have problem with Invalid certificate error for so long, then they're not serious with security and privacy at all.

Sorry but expired certificate is pure sign of amatorship or abandoned ship.

[ChipMixer]

Looks like the certificate expired yesterday.

Thank you - certificate has been renewed.

In Chipmixer's case, i can only assume it's probably just the task of renewing the certificate that hasn't been automated.

Yes, it is manual.

fucking scammers. 2 days ago I sent them 150 dollars - I received 3 keys for 45$, and one key was invalid, 100 dollars were stolen from me, I wrote them to the EMAIL - they do not answer. SCAMMERS! DO NOT WORK WITH THEM TO ANYONE

Please contact us again by e-mail and provide "invalid" key.

in this case probably you received 2 private keys and 1 voucher code

We did not run out of chips lately.

if it's a private key then it should come in pair with its bitcoin address (at step 3 or signed receipt)
can you check that address on block explorer?
if it is indeed unfunded (never funded) then there was a glitch on ChipMixer system
and I'm pretty sure ChipMixer will rectify it either by funding or replacing it, just have to be patient

If it was never funded then signed receipt would be easy proof.

[operator55]

Looks like the certificate expired yesterday.

Thank you - certificate has been renewed.

In Chipmixer's case, i can only assume it's probably just the task of renewing the certificate that hasn't been automated.

Yes, it is manual.

fucking scammers. 2 days ago I sent them 150 dollars - I received 3 keys for 45$, and one key was invalid, 100 dollars were stolen from me, I wrote them to the EMAIL - they do not answer. SCAMMERS! DO NOT WORK WITH THEM TO ANYONE

Please contact us again by e-mail and provide "invalid" key.

in this case probably you received 2 private keys and 1 voucher code

We did not run out of chips lately.

if it's a private key then it should come in pair with its bitcoin address (at step 3 or signed receipt)
can you check that address on block explorer?
if it is indeed unfunded (never funded) then there was a glitch on ChipMixer system
and I'm pretty sure ChipMixer will rectify it either by funding or replacing it, just have to be patient

If it was never funded then signed receipt would be easy proof.

Why dont you purchase commercial certificate for $40 that stays for a year instead of deadling with let's encrypt renewals?

[HeRetiK]

Why dont you purchase commercial certificate for $40 that stays for a year instead of deadling with let's encrypt renewals?

In some setups dealing with commercial certificates can be actually more cumbersome than running a simple letsencrypt script.

More interesting would be to know why they haven't automated the letsencrypt renewal

(says the guy that has to regularly SSH into his own server to manually run letsencrypt scripts before the certs run out)

[james3441]

Does this mixer prevent you from receiving own coins?

[TheQuin]

Does this mixer prevent you from receiving own coins?

If you withdraw chips they are created before you deposited so it is impossible that they were funded from the same coins.

[james3441]

Does this mixer prevent you from receiving own coins?

If you withdraw chips they are created before you deposited so it is impossible that they were funded from the same coins.

What if i come back after 2 days and mix again?
Can i receive same coins i sent 2 days ago? Because the chips can be created from these coins (sent 2 days ago)

I think this mixer has no protection against such common scenario. Or am i wrong?

[TheQuin]

What if i come back after 2 days and mix again?
Can i receive same coins i sent 2 days ago? Because the chips can be created from these coins (sent 2 days ago)

I think this mixer has no protection against such common scenario. Or am i wrong?

It really doesn't matter as all anyone can see is that you used a chip. If you use it as it is intended you would not send the chips back to the originating wallet so there is no way anyone could know if the chips were funded by you on a previous use of the service.

[james3441]

What if i come back after 2 days and mix again?
Can i receive same coins i sent 2 days ago? Because the chips can be created from these coins (sent 2 days ago)

I think this mixer has no protection against such common scenario. Or am i wrong?

It really doesn't matter as all anyone can see is that you used a chip.

So the mixer doesn't protect against this scenario...
I can also split my coins that intend to mix "as chips" values and i will be still using the "input dirty" funds.

It matters if you get chips from the same address that you just sends funds to... few days ago. It's like getting chips from yourself...
Who cares if they were sent to this address 1 day ago? I still receive "chips" belonging to the same funds that i sent 2 days ago.

Risky.

[TheQuin]

So the mixer doesn't protect against this scenario...

Because it is not a scenario that needs protecting against. It is extremely unlikely to occur and if it did it would not decrease your privacy in any way.

[james3441]

So the mixer doesn't protect against this scenario...

Because it is not a scenario that needs protecting against. It is extremely unlikely to occur and if it did it would not decrease your privacy in any way.

How would re-using funds that were supposed to be mixed not decrease privacy? That's like using funds that were never mixed.
These funds would be just like i never used mixer. I know that you wont receive all chips from single address, but even getting a part of it - it's making you receive part of your input "dirty" funds.
And you dont want to use them, do you? You want to get rid of them. And there's chance you can receive these funds in chipmixer.... by using the service often, not one time per month.


Same as if i have funds and i split them now to chip values? Is it mixed? Is it secure? No

Let me give example.

01.01.2019 - you try to mix coins with chipmixer, you receive your keys..
04.01.2019 - chipmixer splits coins into chips, this happens with funds received on 01.01.2019.
12.01.2019 - you try to mix coins again with chipmixer, by such coincidence you receive chips that were partially created from funds that you sent on 01.01.2019 and that were converted to chips on 04.01.2019

This means that part of your money was not mixed and you're most likely not even aware at all and can be making critical mistake.

[TheQuin]

How would re-using funds that were supposed to be mixed not decrease privacy?

Because there is no way for anybody to tell if the chip was funded by the same person reusing the service later or not. All chips are funded prior to your deposit so it breaks the link. All any blockchain analysis can tell anyone is that it likely came from Chipmixer. Unless you were to do something silly like send the chips back to the wallet they originated from it is not of any concern.

[LoyceV]

How would re-using funds that were supposed to be mixed not decrease privacy?

Chipmixer explains fungibility in the FAQ. In short:

It's the idea that a one ten dollar note is the same as any other ten dollar note.

I can also split my coins that intend to mix "as chips" values and i will be still using the "input dirty" funds.

You can make your own chip-sized transactions. And the more people do that, the more difficult it becomes to distinguish between chips.

[spacedoutqt]

Put roughly $170 worth of coins into the mixer and I forgot my voucher but still have my session. When I go into the session it says it is still waiting for a conformation, anyway I can get my voucher and my coins?