[WTS] Bitcoin Mixer Source Code - Start your own mixing service! 1 BTC

[dilb3rt]

If you're interested in purchasing this, please PM me.  Testnet transactions for proof upon request!

What is it?

This is a bitcoin mixer coded in Java that uses a centralized variation of CoinJoin to anonymize bitcoins, as well as methods to lower taint percentages.  It relies on bitcoinj (0.10) to provide a lightweight bitcoin mixer that anybody can run on a limited-resource server (you don't have to download the whole blockchain).  It is, however, ready and willing to be built upon.  It uses an http-based API with so you can easily use it in any language or project.

Is it secure?

Yes.  The code never works directly with private keys (it interfaces bitcoinj for that), and it's possible to isolate the program on a seperate, secure server and use it via the API from a different server.  The only (known) potentially vulnerable point for the program is it's API, and it's been tested for insecurities already.  Since you get the source code, you're able to inspect and modify the program yourself.

What do I get?

All the source code (that is also commented!), already-compiled binaries, the Maven pom.xml file to be able to compile yourself, and detailed instructions about running and customizing the program.  On your system, you need to have Java 1.6, MongoDB, and Maven installed.  You're able to customize various things about the program from a config file - testNet or mainNet (or regTest), how much to charge, confirmations to wait for, minimum deposit amount, etc.
You can also contact me if you have any difficulties or questions when setting it up.

Why am I selling this?

The very limited amount of bitcoin mixers and tumblers available for use is a big problem because they either don't work well, don't adapt to specific needs, or they can steal coins and get away with it because their service is a necessity.  However, there is another potential problem - if anybody was able to set up a bitcoin mixer, then we'd see an even larger amount of thefts and scams.  By including a price wall, I hope to sell this to only serious buyers.  The other problem is that services that should be using a mixer aren't able to because of technical limitations.  By selling this, I hope to provide an easy solution.

To inquire, PM me.  Thanks!  

[nahtnam]

I think its overpriced. Thats over $1000. It something that a person could create in a few days...

[dilb3rt]

I think its overpriced. Thats over $1000. It something that a person could create in a few days...

Any competent developer would charge more than this to create an equivalent and this is an easy-to-use, already available solution.

[nahtnam]

I think its overpriced. Thats over $1000. It something that a person could create in a few days...

Any competent developer would charge more than this to create an equivalent and this is an easy-to-use, already available solution.

Really? If for some reason decide to make a mixer I would sell it for 0.1 max...

[dilb3rt]

I think its overpriced. Thats over $1000. It something that a person could create in a few days...

Any competent developer would charge more than this to create an equivalent and this is an easy-to-use, already available solution.

Really? If for some reason decide to make a mixer I would sell it for 0.1 max...

Feel free.  I'm providing a professionally made program for anyone who isn't able to make it themselves or wouldn't want to hire a developer to create it for them.

[Martijnvdc]

I think its overpriced. Thats over $1000. It something that a person could create in a few days...

Any competent developer would charge more than this to create an equivalent and this is an easy-to-use, already available solution.

Really? If for some reason decide to make a mixer I would sell it for 0.1 max...

Feel free.  I'm providing a professionally made program for anyone who isn't able to make it themselves or wouldn't want to hire a developer to create it for them.

He's 14, don't worry.
And why the hell would he charge only 0.1 for something that takes "days to develop"??
If people were to hire a develloper to make it for them it would easily cost as much as OP is asking... It's a reasonable price.

[Martijnvdc]

Actually anyone that is willing to buy this for 1 BTC is really stupid. Why? Cause no one would use a bitcoin mixer that is centralized, when bitcoin mixers exist that are already decentralized. They are mostly beta, but they don't require you to send funds to a third party that could run away with it. And they use coinjoin.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rr6DeziHdFs

I think you should read the OP again...

[gweedo]

Actually anyone that is willing to buy this for 1 BTC is really stupid. Why? Cause no one would use a bitcoin mixer that is centralized, when bitcoin mixers exist that are already decentralized. They are mostly beta, but they don't require you to send funds to a third party that could run away with it. And they use coinjoin.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rr6DeziHdFs

I think you should read the OP again...

I did and it concludes my point, no one uses centralized mixers. They are worthless.

[dilb3rt]

Actually anyone that is willing to buy this for 1 BTC is really stupid. Why? Cause no one would use a bitcoin mixer that is centralized, when bitcoin mixers exist that are already decentralized. They are mostly beta, but they don't require you to send funds to a third party that could run away with it. And they use coinjoin.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rr6DeziHdFs

I anticipated someone would bring this up.  There is a necessity for centralized mixers, standalone as well as mixers integrated into other types of services such as online stores.  Decentralized mixers don't (yet) scale up, and because a CoinJoin transaction can be as small as 3-4 inputs that doesn't provide a time-gap (time between deposit/withdrawal) or further taint-reduction without more complicated steps, an investigator can still make an educated guess to track coins going through.  My program adds more steps to automatically distance a user from his coins.  Decentralized mixers are also still difficult to use or hard to explain for the average user, as is evident in the video you linked.

This program allows for users to achieve fuller anonymity than what could be achieved using the current decentralized systems available, and it is also much easier to use.  The answer to mistrust in centralized mixers shouldn't just be decentralized mixers (although there is a place for them as well), as they can't fill every need required of them.  There need to be trustworthy, centralized mixers both for the average user as well as owners who can implement them in various ways.

I don't want this thread to become a conversation about the merits of centralized and decentralized mixers, as there is a need for both.  I am selling a centralized mixer because it fills specific needs, not all of them.

[dilb3rt]

How is decentralized mixers harder to use? You run that program and follow the directions pretty easy. Also the server setup is very easy all scripts. Plus it is open source, technically while you're selling the source code. A person that actually can read it and make sure it is correct isn't going to be buying it.

Also how are decentralized mixers not scalable? The mixer I referenced to is just as scalable as yours. So that would be a completely false statement.

Also how are you calculating taint? It is nearly impossible for there to be a taint calculation when using a SPV client. Another false statement. You would need the complete blockchain to do a taint score that would actually help in hiding funds.

Also you said there is a need for centralized mixers? I really doubt that since so much work is pointed towards decentralized mixing. The reference client will have this built in soon so I don't see why people should pay over $1000 for something that will be obsolete very soon. So another false statement by you.

You are making large assumptions about the technical capacities of many bitcoin users - even the completely non-technical should be able to have access to anonymity.

Please note that this is only using bitcoinj to store keys and communicate with the bitcoin network.  It doesn't depend on bitcoinj's "naive" output selection algorithm, and I have made my own output selection algorithms that are able to carefully control which coins are selected for transactions. Therefore, taint can be controlled by this code.

Online stores and marketplaces have been told by their customers that they need store-run mixers, and in many cases they're essential to respect the privacy and security of customers.  But again, as I said, this is a thread for me to sell my source code to buyers who understand and can use the utility it provides, and not a thread to get into ideological arguments.  Please respect that.

[Damnsammit]

Is this Trade Fortress selling the code that he used to launder all of the Bitcoins he stole?

 

[nahtnam]

I think its overpriced. Thats over $1000. It something that a person could create in a few days...

Any competent developer would charge more than this to create an equivalent and this is an easy-to-use, already available solution.

Really? If for some reason decide to make a mixer I would sell it for 0.1 max...

Feel free.  I'm providing a professionally made program for anyone who isn't able to make it themselves or wouldn't want to hire a developer to create it for them.

He's 14, don't worry.
And why the hell would he charge only 0.1 for something that takes "days to develop"??
If people were to hire a develloper to make it for them it would easily cost as much as OP is asking... It's a reasonable price.

I spent a few days working on my faucet, and im selling that for 0.1. You know what? Once I fully learn ror (stopped using php), ill make one and give it away for free. Just for fun

[dilb3rt]

I am not making the large assumptions of about technical, you are confused. If I have to generate 100000 keys in a short time, that will eat a lot of cpu power. The decentralized client doesn't have to generate any keys. You are just saying cause your is a more of a client, than a web server that it does handle transactions in a very low cpu manner that is true. Then you can't calculate taint cause you again are not validating transactions.

Also you said non-technical should have access to anonymity where does the decentralized client make a person program or make it different? If you double click you can use that mixer, unlike yours where a 3rd party has to set it up and be trusted. Big Difference.

You didn't answer my question without a full blockchain you can't calculate taint at all. Bitcoinj is currently only uses SPV headers, not enough information for taint. So how are you calculating taint in a SPV blockchain since it is impossible?

Most online stores are using bitpay and coinbase. Also you could just use a bitcoind and by not creating raw txs you can get a pretty random mixer. So again how is this helping anyone?

Stop dancing around my questions and answer them, otherwise I will be force to label this as a scam, as it does not produce what you claim it produces.
  

Maybe you misunderstood what I meant by 'technical' - I don't mean that their hardware is worse, but that they don't have enough technical knowledge of how bitcoin and computers work to use decentralized mixing systems.  Even the easiest software is confusing for many people, and a website-based centralized mixer where all one has to do is send their coins is a much easier and likelier solution for these non-technical users. This program also does not create tens of thousands of new addresses initially.  It is possible to scale this program as your needs scale, adding addresses as you need them.

I think you might be confused about how this program achieves both mixing and taint-reduction.  It's possible to control taint without having to calculate it - once we know that taint is the measurement of a connection between two addresses, we can make sure that the deposit and withdrawal have as little possible or no connection at all.  This is done in all cases by distancing the deposit address from the withdrawal address by sending the coins through various intermediary transactions, but also trying as often as possible to not use the deposit at all until after the associated withdrawal is made.  There are checks and balances in the code that make sure this happens whenever it can.  The only time that a deposited address is used at all for an associated withdrawal is if there aren't any other available funds available in the system - but also keep in mind that this deposit has been mixed into the system if it is used, providing anonymous coins anyways.

It's apparent that you're taking a very dogmatic stance against centralized mixers.  I think all the issues you're trying to point out isn't a problem in my program or my code, but a problem with the current ecosystem of centralized mixers.  Start a thread with your critique of centralized mixers, I'd be more than willing to participate.

[dilb3rt]

How is the decentralized program harder to use than yours? All I am doing is running the program going to a website and it is doing all the signing for me. Just like yours, the end user just has to know how to send bitcoins.

So you are not using taint at all, so you can't claim that, and that makes your coinjoins not taint proof. You can't claim you calculate taint cause you generate an address and use a different address to make the transaction. Please watch this http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6hc8qaR_Fok then you will understand how that doesn't protect privacy at all.

No I am taking aim at your program. Cause you are honestly trying to scam newbies by saying all these fancy words, and clearly your program doesn't deliver on those promises. That is what a scam is.

I've never said that this program calculates taint. There's no need for taint calculation because there is absolutely no connection between a deposit and an associated withdrawal in this system if it's managed right.  BitcoinFog uses the same technique with success - refer to this white paper that analyzes various centralized mixers - https://www.wi.uni-muenster.de/sites/default/files/public/department/itsecurity/mbc13/mbc13-moeser-paper.pdf

If I was trying to sell this to 'newbies' I wouldn't be selling it for so much.  I've researched various methods of blockchain anonymity and obfuscation and believe that this program provides as much anonymity as possible in a bitcoin mixing system.  I have testnet transactions that are available to any serious buyer, as I mention in the OP, so they can see that this program does what I say it does.

[dilb3rt]

So how can you tell that it lowers the taint percentage, if your not calculating taint? Then you are just talking and don't have statistics to prove that it does lower taint percentages.

Also do you know how bitcoin fog works? It is very centralized and does it different from your program. It sends coins over time. But they don't claim they get rid of taint, they clearly upfront about it justs takes a disconnect.

You are saying newbies don't have enough money? Cause I am pretty sure there are a couple newbies here that more money than a lot of people here. What I am saying is some newbies don't do research and you are misleading them and don't say your not cause you are clearly doing that.

I know whatever I say you will just say I am wrong and keep yelling that your program does A,B and C. When it clearly doesn't and I have prove this many times throughout this thread.

Again, there are methods to lower taint without having to calculate it since we know how taint is calculated.  The paper I mentioned in my last post (https://www.wi.uni-muenster.de/sites/default/files/public/department/itsecurity/mbc13/mbc13-moeser-paper.pdf) explains it.  

It is possible to withdraw money over time with my program as well.  Obviously, any serious buyer can request more information to see exactly how it works and look at transactions on the testNet blockchain for proof that it works.  

[dilb3rt]

And the video that linked before http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6hc8qaR_Fok proves how that paper is wrong, so obviously you didn't read that paper and watch the video, like I did. The guy explains how privacy and disconnected addresses can still be linked. Which in turn disproves your statements that it lowers taint.

Formal taint analysis doesn't use any contextual information.  It is strictly the percentage of possibility that two addresses are associated with each other.  With that, we can bring taint down to 0% in as many cases as possible with a well-managed mixer.  

Listen to his response to the question at 22:30, about having more inputs than outputs.  Withdrawal amounts from my mixer don't have to be the same as an input amount.  He argues that the mismatch of inputs to outputs becomes a subset sum problem (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Subset_sum_problem) but, first, a user could span withdrawals over a long time, and second, there would be too many outputs to calculate the sums and try to attach the sums to inputs.  There is also the fact that a deposit could be spanned over several inputs.  

Ultimately, he has a weak argument against mixers that do this correctly - for him, the argument against centralized mixers comes down to trust.  While trust is an issue in some cases, there are trustworthy entities that can set up mixers, and this is what I'm attempting to help do.

[dilb3rt]

Why do you keep going on that you can bring taint to 0%? That isn't true at all, at first your saying you will have a low taint, and now your saying it has a 0% of being tainted. You are going back on forth on your numbers and sayings. So clearly you know nothing about taint.

I am done with this thread, cause I have proved many times you have no bases for your mixer to be anything you had said to be true in your OP. You are just trying to rip people off good day.

I provide testNet transaction logs for interested buyers so they can see that everything works before they buy it.  The paper I referenced has explanations and case studies that outline various techniques that ensure high levels of anonymity.  It shows that taint, the possible connection between two addresses, can be brought down to 0% if the mixer is run properly.

[kireyanchik]

TS ready? See personal mail

[BawsyBoss]

What gweedo is saying simply makes too much sense. Buying this would be pointless.