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

[moejoejay]

@ll
thnx for ur input and suggestions

I'm not sure what you mean.

Like Loyce, I don't understand what this means. Do you want to 'obfuscate change' by exchanging it for Monero and exchanging it back, instead of mixing it or sending to a Lightning channel? What is a 'multi exchange'?

Yep, this is what i mean make mutliple swaps to obfuscate the change vs. send to lightning.

sorry it was not really well described.

ps: i found this article really informative : https://en.bitcoin.it/Privacy
best regards

[n0nce]

I'm not sure what you mean.

Like Loyce, I don't understand what this means. Do you want to 'obfuscate change' by exchanging it for Monero and exchanging it back, instead of mixing it or sending to a Lightning channel? What is a 'multi exchange'?

Yep, this is what i mean make mutliple swaps to obfuscate the change vs. send to lightning.

sorry it was not really well described.

ps: i found this article really informative : https://en.bitcoin.it/Privacy
best regards

You can do that, but you'll have a few downsides.
(1) Exchange rates; may lose some amount of BTC due to exchange rate fluctuations.
(2) Not trustless (unless the exchange uses atomic swaps); a submarine swap is trustless.
(3) On-chain links may be possible; LN is off-chain and you most likely receive the full balance through multiple different channels, making it much harder to track by amounts. There is no public blockchain to audit and onion routing of the actual payment makes it hard to track channel state updates, even if you control a ton of nodes.

[RickDeckard]

Today, I start up Tails OS (which connects through Tor), import the 0.008 BTC chip into Electrum, and spend the coins. I make sure to spend the full amount, without creating a change address.

For the level of technical expertise that I have I fancy this solution. I wonder, if someone has a hardware wallet - such as a Trezor - would he/she still be able to send the coins to his/her hardware wallet in a mostly private way? (Assuming that whoever is using the Trezor is connected to his own full node[1])
[1]https://blog.trezor.io/connecting-your-wallet-to-a-full-node-edf56693b545

[jackg]

Today, I start up Tails OS (which connects through Tor), import the 0.008 BTC chip into Electrum, and spend the coins. I make sure to spend the full amount, without creating a change address.

For the level of technical expertise that I have I fancy this solution. I wonder, if someone has a hardware wallet - such as a Trezor - would he/she still be able to send the coins to his/her hardware wallet in a mostly private way? (Assuming that whoever is using the Trezor is connected to his own full node[1])
[1]https://blog.trezor.io/connecting-your-wallet-to-a-full-node-edf56693b545

I've done a very quick search and found tails os might be compatible with trezor. If so, and the electrum is what's compatible, could you just use a strong passphrase+tor to get a high level of privacy (the passphrase for trezor extends the nmemonic).

This is assuming you're going to have and use different wallets. Trezor suite also has tor built in but you could still be vulnerable that way if it's on your main os and not a live instance.

[ChipMixer]

I wonder, if someone has a hardware wallet - such as a Trezor - would he/she still be able to send the coins to his/her hardware wallet in a mostly private way? (Assuming that whoever is using the Trezor is connected to his own full node[1])

Hardware wallets are good for keeping funds safe but they are not good for privacy. Even if you use your own full node each time you use it there may be time you will have to use their web wallet and all your history and addresses will be linked.

Most private way to use hardware wallet - hold your funds there and mix some before you send them out. Create empty electrum wallet and import chips if you use ChipMixer or create new seed wallet if you use other mixers. Delete used wallet. If you do not reuse wallet then it cannot be linked by accident.

[vonutage]

I found 2 issue when I tried to visit Chipmixer now.

1- If you google "chipmixer" ; you can see .xyz in the 1st line. So if someone look for chipmixer on google, probably will be scammed.



2- When I tried to click on forum's banner which forum's user signature; a warning appear. But it is directing us to strange link. Not easy to trust with this way.






It should be easy to reach right website easily, so everyone can trust in.

[o_e_l_e_o]

1- If you google "chipmixer" ; you can see .xyz in the 1st line. So if someone look for chipmixer on google, probably will be scammed.

If you look for any sensitive website via Google, you will probably be scammed. Google will happily host and promote scam sites, software, apps, and so on, without a second thought, as long as the scammers are willing to pay. Still using Google for anything is the biggest mistake here.

2- When I tried to click on forum's banner which forum's user signature; a warning appear. But it is directing us to strange link. Not easy to trust with this way.

The "strange link" is a standard Tor link, which is now the only way to use ChipMixer. It is safer and more private than using clearnet, anyway.

[jackg]

1- If you google "chipmixer" ; you can see .xyz in the 1st line. So if someone look for chipmixer on google, probably will be scammed.

If you look for any sensitive website via Google, you will probably be scammed. Google will happily host and promote scam sites, software, apps, and so on, without a second thought, as long as the scammers are willing to pay. Still using Google for anything is the biggest mistake here.

Duckduckgo provides the correct link as the top result.

I'd rate googling chipmixer as problematic for your privacy from the start too. But as mentioned, using Google for anything financially significant is going to land you out of pocket or waste your time. I've seen 6 ads for things I don't want when making more mainstream searches and finally the site I wanted under all that (being the first non ad result).

2- When I tried to click on forum's banner which forum's user signature; a warning appear. But it is directing us to strange link. Not easy to trust with this way.

You can get access to it by downloading the browser from torproject.org or running tails (a Linux distro - I'd recommend using external storage  to store your recovery token though if you do that).

[RickDeckard]

It should be easy to reach right website easily, so everyone can trust in.

It should be easy to reach the service provided that Google doesn't list fake lookalike websites[1][2][3][4][5][6] instead of the original - real - one. Due to issues such as the one mention before and a massive DDoS attack, ChipMixer decided[7] that the clearnet address would only be informative. Like others said before me, there's currently only one way to access ChipMixer:

Tor v3 link: http://chipmixorflykuxu56uxy7gf5o6ggig7xru7dnihc4fm4cxqsc63e6id.onion (chip mix or fly, new Segwit)
Tor v2 link: http://chipmixerwzxtzbw.onion/ (obsolete, non Segwit)

LoyceV also left this information on the official Chipmixer user account[8] to make things even more transparent. I understand that, at first sight, this decision may look like that Chipmixer is "hardening" the access to their service but in reality they are just trying their best to protect their customers (and service).

You can get access to it by downloading the browser from torproject.org or running tails (a Linux distro - I'd recommend using external storage  to store your recovery token though if you do that).

I also recommend this method. You can follow this[9] guide in order to install Tails to a bootable USB device. Whenever you need to use Chipmixer or even make transactions, you can run your operations on Tails OS! Chipmixer also supports this MO[10].
[1]https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=5318195.0
[2]https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=5318195.msg56388168#msg56388168
[3]https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=5406044.msg60557690#msg60557690
[4]https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=5406044.msg60557690#msg60557690
[5]https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=5272178.msg55094411#msg55094411
[6]https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=1935098.msg60403691#msg60403691
[7]https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=1935098.msg60186638#msg60186638
[8]https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?action=trust;u=1003345 - clearnet address just informative as of now.
[9]https://tails.boum.org/install/windows/index.en.html
[10]https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=1935098.msg61288467#msg61288467

[NotATether]

@Chipmixer

So there's this random guy called FatManTerra who usually babbles about Luna but is now claiming that Chipmixer is a NSA honeypot: https://btc-pulse.com/popular-crypto-mixer-may-be-a-cia-nsa-project/

Mind debunking that news for us?

This is VERY important to debunk because FatManTerra has an entire echo chamber on Twitter and also because he's telling them that "centralized mixers are very illegal".

[LoyceV]

So there's this random guy called FatManTerra who usually babbles about Luna but is now claiming that Chipmixer is a NSA honeypot: https://btc-pulse.com/popular-crypto-mixer-may-be-a-cia-nsa-project/

Mind debunking that news for us?

I don't think it's possible to debunk this: you can't prove it, just like I can't prove I don't work for the NSA (so he's saying my signature may work for the NSA?).

This is VERY important to debunk because FatManTerra has an entire echo chamber on Twitter and also because he's telling them that "centralized mixers are very illegal".

I'll throw in a counter argument: privacy is a human right.

I only know "FatManTerra" from this 4 Bitcoin bet, where he tried to change the Bet terms afterwards. He's not someone who's opinion I value.

[BlackHatCoiner]

So there's this random guy called FatManTerra who usually babbles about Luna but is now claiming that Chipmixer is a NSA honeypot: https://btc-pulse.com/popular-crypto-mixer-may-be-a-cia-nsa-project/

What is freely asserted is freely denied. It's nothing more than a conspiracy theory to go out and state that a mixing service is a honeypot, just because you think it is. The fact that he concluded it's a US honeypot, just because it follows the "pay what you want model" is laughable.

This is VERY important to debunk because FatManTerra has an entire echo chamber on Twitter and also because he's telling them that "centralized mixers are very illegal".

And you think that most of this service's audience comes from Twitter folks who follow babblers with "FatManTerra" in their username? Dunno, but I doubt.

[NotATether]

And you think that most of this service's audience comes from Twitter folks who follow babblers with "FatManTerra" in their username? Dunno, but I doubt.

Not that, but the news is picking up on the rumor. They basically open their mouths every time he tweets something. And obviously we can't challenge any of that, because we're all on Chipmixer's payroll so they will notice that.

Just a short post here such as "we are not a US government honeypot" should be enough to make them shut their mouths. The real CIA/NSA don't like to comment about anything, so people will notice the difference.

[LoyceV]

Just a short post here such as "we are not a US government honeypot" should be enough to make them shut their mouths. The real CIA/NSA don't like to comment about anything, so people will notice the difference.

Denying it will just lead to this:

Exactly what I’d expect an agent to say

Or use this argument again:

Just think.. In all likelihood CM is an NSA honeypot anyway, lol..
Could be..

Brilliant. Then we finally got the NSA to work with embargoed countries after all these years.

I like eddie13's take on things:

Same principle..
Anyone could be a scammer..
Anyone could be an agent..
The only person responsible for protecting your ass is YOU..

[BlackHatCoiner]

Just a short post here such as "we are not a US government honeypot" should be enough to make them shut their mouths.

Just as I said, what is freely asserted is freely denied. There's no way to figure out it's a honeypot or not, unless ChipMixer decides to sacrifice some serious privacy. It's entirely possible to be one.

Why not ignoring assholes on Twitter again?

[n0nce]

Mind debunking that news for us?

A few things that stood out to me, which make it look like just another shitcoiner with limited Bitcoin knowledge and / or experience.

Implying that a mixer is bad because it's used by high-profile criminals is counter-intuitive. If anything, you probably want to use the best privacy tools, even though you have different goals, that also high-profile 'wanted' people, such as criminals or persecuted individuals use.

ChipMixer has been used by several high-profile criminals, such as the Ronin bridge hackers (from North Korea!) & the Binance hackers.

This user also stated some simply false claims. Such as:

ChipMixer is running normally (on the clearnet, at that!)

The following sentence makes no sense; you can't really have both. And we could get into the 'taint' argument again, i.e. criminals are brought to jail when using cash, too, even though they have some pretty good anonymity when using cash. It is not illegal to exchange one cash bill for another, nobody even thinks about that, and nobody looks at serial numbers on cash bills. Yet he seems to buy into the 'Anonymity helps criminals' argument like a total beginner.

While I obviously support criminals going to jail, I also think optional anonymity is important

He also seems to be clueless about WasabiWallet's anti-Bitcoin and anti-privacy ('just a little privacy') stance:

For those interested in alternatives, check out CoinJoin tools like Wasabi Wallet.

[dkbit98]

When I tried to click on forum's banner which forum's user signature; a warning appear. But it is directing us to strange link. Not easy to trust with this way.

There is nothing strange with tor onion links, everyone who uses internet heard about them, and there is good reason whey Chipmixer disabled clearnet mixing.
You also shouldn't trust any search engine to find anything you need, they accept scam ads and they are often pushing phishing websites on top.

This is VERY important to debunk because FatManTerra has an entire echo chamber on Twitter and also because he's telling them that "centralized mixers are very illegal".

I never heard about this shitcoiner FatManTerra, and I saw his tweets that some crypto magazines are now spreading around.
I guess there is no much action in shitcoin world so he decided to shift blame from FTX to someone else  
This is not the first time I am hearing this theory about Chipmixer (even some bitcointalk members believe in this), but I don't think there is any way for owners to prove this is not true.

[ChipMixer]

Google will happily host and promote scam sites, software, apps, and so on, without a second thought, as long as the scammers are willing to pay. Still using Google for anything is the biggest mistake here.

Also one time they took it (few years old .com) down because new domain (few months .online maybe) filed for copyright.

So there's this random guy called FatManTerra who usually babbles about Luna but is now claiming that Chipmixer is a NSA honeypot
Mind debunking that news for us?

Try our customer service then try any gov customer service.

[Bill Gates]

So there's this random guy called FatManTerra who usually babbles about Luna but is now claiming that Chipmixer is a NSA honeypot
Mind debunking that news for us?

Try our customer service then try any gov customer service.

Thought of asking the following questions to you openly, instead of asking your customer service.

I see, you are using a CAPTCHA. I'm not sure if it was there from the beginning.

1. What's the purpose of it?

2. Is it generated through some third party service?

3. If yes, which one? Do not they get to know your customer's data as well?

4. How about using HCAPTCHA instead of it?

[TryNinja]

I'm not CM, but...

I see, you are using a CAPTCHA. I'm not sure if it was there from the beginning.

1. What's the purpose of it?

Stopping abuse, of course.

i.e people spamming sessions as a DDoS measure.

2. Is it generated through some third party service?

It's just an image, most likely fully generated on their server (and it doesn't point to any external website; check it yourself: right click -> open image in a new tab -> check url).

3. If yes, which one? Do not they get to know your customer's data as well?

Answer seems obvious here.

4. How about using HCAPTCHA instead of it?

Answer also seems obvious. Of course it's not a good idea to implement a third party script on their website, especially due to CM's nature.

https://www.hcaptcha.com/terms

15. Our Use of Information

By performing tasks on our website, you authorize the collection, use, and disclosure of your personal information in accordance with our Privacy Policy. In addition, we may share certain information about you and your completed tasks to the Requester whose tasks you have completed to facilitate the service relationship and improve the website, including, for example, Contributor ID, results of completed tasks, and other attributes related to your qualifications, languages, skills, and use of the website.