✰ [ANN] BITMIXER.IO ✰ High Volume Bitcoin Mixer ✰

[tspacepilot]

Clearly, my Bitmixer code remains on file attached to bitcoin wallet addresses I've previously used, else there would be a strong possibility of me receiving some of the coins back that I may not want attached to me, but that would be an impossibility given that ALL order data is purged from your system within 24 hours, as stated above, resulting in the 3-LAs et al. finding nothing.

I don't know if this is how they do this, but if the "bitmixer code" is a hash of an address, because hashes are one-way, that should be able to provide the basis for a system where they're not storing your old "from" addresses, but can check when you ask in the future that they aren't re-using anything.

[1714149081]

1714149081

[1714149081]

1714149081

[1714149081]

1714149081

[1714149081]

1714149081

[1714149081]

1714149081

[Gleb Gamow]

Clearly, my Bitmixer code remains on file attached to bitcoin wallet addresses I've previously used, else there would be a strong possibility of me receiving some of the coins back that I may not want attached to me, but that would be an impossibility given that ALL order data is purged from your system within 24 hours, as stated above, resulting in the 3-LAs et al. finding nothing.

I don't know if this is how they do this, but if the "bitmixer code" is a hash of an address, because hashes are one-way, that should be able to provide the basis for a system where they're not storing your old "from" addresses, but can check when you ask in the future that they aren't re-using anything.

Day 1: I exchange bitcoins via Addy1. Attached to Addy1 is a b-code so that I don't get my nefariously-obtained BTC back.

24 hrs later: The transaction is purged from Bitmixer's servers.

Day 3: I exchange bitcoins via Addy2. Bitmixer gives me others' BTC with no chance of me getting coins from Addy1 thanks to the b-code attached to my account.

See the paradox? It's impossible for them to do my Day 3 transaction if my Day 1 transaction was purged from their platform as promised but fully capable of performing such due to some b-code. Ergo, if there's no record of the first transaction, then it's highly probable that one could obtain coins that they didn't want to be attached to. It can't be 100% possible to have it both ways.

[shield132]

I searched now (again on their website and see these:)

The generated address is valid for 24 hours only. We completely delete your order's data after 24 hours. All further payments will be ignored.

But everything is "put in" letter of guarantee because as they say, if there wents something wrong, only letter of guarantee can help customers.

For your peace of mind we always provide this and sign it from our main bitcoin account 1BitmixerEiyyp3eTLaCpgBbhYERs48qza. You may verify our digital sign using your Bitcoin wallet.

Maybe is this what they use to get rid of old coins to be returned to customer?
There is no doubt they are saving some information, for example that signes. Don't know if it sounds good but this is what I tried.

[tspacepilot]

See the paradox? It's impossible for them to do my Day 3 transaction if my Day 1 transaction was purged from their platform as promised but fully capable of performing such due to some b-code. Ergo, if there's no record of the first transaction, then it's highly probable that one could obtain coins that they didn't want to be attached to. It can't be 100% possible to have it both ways.

I do see the paradox, yes.  I'd love to hear their answer.  I have the intuition that hashes could form the basis of a system which partially answers the question, but I don't have it all worked out.

Day 1: Bruno sends me coins from address 1, I hash "Bruno@mail.com" and "address1" (separately) and concatenate them to get the "bitmixer code"
Day 2: ...
Day 3: Bruno sends me coins from address 1.  I need to make sure I don't send him any coins that came from previous addresses from Bruno.  I hash "Bruno@mail.com" and get the first half of a "bitmixer code".  I choose an address to send him coins from by excluding any candidates which exist in my DB of bitmixer codes where the first half of the code is hash(Bruno@mail.com).

I agree that it seems that they have to be storing something, in my sloppily constructed example a list of bitmixer codes which are a hash of a username and an address.  I suppose that as long as they don't store the actual username they can claim they don't have a record.  Anyway, I hope they answer your question which was very well put.

[Gleb Gamow]

See the paradox? It's impossible for them to do my Day 3 transaction if my Day 1 transaction was purged from their platform as promised but fully capable of performing such due to some b-code. Ergo, if there's no record of the first transaction, then it's highly probable that one could obtain coins that they didn't want to be attached to. It can't be 100% possible to have it both ways.

I do see the paradox, yes.  I'd love to hear their answer.  I have the intuition that hashes could form the basis of a system which partially answers the question, but I don't have it all worked out.

Day 1: Bruno sends me coins from address 1, I hash "Bruno@mail.com" and "address1" (separately) and concatenate them to get the "bitmixer code"
Day 2: ...
Day 3: Bruno sends me coins from address 1.  I need to make sure I don't send him any coins that came from previous addresses from Bruno.  I hash "Bruno@mail.com" and get the first half of a "bitmixer code".  I choose an address to send him coins from by excluding any candidates which exist in my DB of bitmixer codes where the first half of the code is hash(Bruno@mail.com).

I agree that it seems that they have to be storing something, in my sloppily constructed example a list of bitmixer codes which are a hash of a username and an address.  I suppose that as long as they don't store the actual username they can claim they don't have a record.  Anyway, I hope they answer your question which was very well put.

Having never used their service, are you telling me that they require a username stored on their platform? If that's the case, this entity is looking more and more like a front organization each passing day. Put another way, if Bitmixer isn't a CIA et al. operation, then they prove how inept they are, for there's no way in hell a 3-LA should've missed the boat by not setting up a like venture for the purpose of gleaning whatever the fuck it is they glean.

@CIA: I don't really live a van with four flat tires on the banks of the Colorado River. I live in Josh Zerlan's basement. Come and get me. 

[tspacepilot]

Having never used their service, are you telling me that they require a username stored on their platform? If that's the case, this entity is looking more and more like a front organization each passing day. Put another way, if Bitmixer isn't a CIA et al. operation, then they prove how inept they are, for there's no way in hell a 3-LA should've missed the boat by not setting up a like venture for the purpose of gleaning whatever the fuck it is they glean.

@CIA: I don't really live a van with four flat tires on the banks of the Colorado River. I live in Josh Zerlan's basement. Come and get me. 

Lol.

Well they say they send you a PGP signed message so I suppose they have to send it somewhere.  Maybe that's a "username".  For the record, I've never used the service either.  Not saying I wouldn't use it.  Maybe I would.

[Gleb Gamow]

Having never used their service, are you telling me that they require a username stored on their platform? If that's the case, this entity is looking more and more like a front organization each passing day. Put another way, if Bitmixer isn't a CIA et al. operation, then they prove how inept they are, for there's no way in hell a 3-LA should've missed the boat by not setting up a like venture for the purpose of gleaning whatever the fuck it is they glean.

@CIA: I don't really live a van with four flat tires on the banks of the Colorado River. I live in Josh Zerlan's basement. Come and get me. 

Lol.

Well they say they send you a PGP signed message so I suppose they have to send it somewhere.  Maybe that's a "username".  For the record, I've never used the service either.  Not saying I wouldn't use it.  Maybe I would.

To be clear, I'm not saying that they may go rogue someday, always a slight possibility, just that according to my findings still disproven, a nefarious actor obfuscating the source of their loot may not necessarily be protected on this site. On second thought, why the fuck do I even care? Surely, such a 3-LA-backed entity would bode well for the crypto space, eh?

[Quickseller]

Having never used their service, are you telling me that they require a username stored on their platform? If that's the case, this entity is looking more and more like a front organization each passing day. Put another way, if Bitmixer isn't a CIA et al. operation, then they prove how inept they are, for there's no way in hell a 3-LA should've missed the boat by not setting up a like venture for the purpose of gleaning whatever the fuck it is they glean.

@CIA: I don't really live a van with four flat tires on the banks of the Colorado River. I live in Josh Zerlan's basement. Come and get me. 

Lol.

Well they say they send you a PGP signed message so I suppose they have to send it somewhere.  Maybe that's a "username".  For the record, I've never used the service either.  Not saying I wouldn't use it.  Maybe I would.

To be clear, I'm not saying that they may go rogue someday, always a slight possibility, just that according to my findings still disproven, a nefarious actor obfuscating the source of their loot may not necessarily be protected on this site. On second thought, why the fuck do I even care? Surely, such a 3-LA-backed entity would bode well for the crypto space, eh?

I think the question is more 'are they lying about deleting customer information' verses 'are they going to go rogue'. Especially when dealing with a sensitive type of business like a mixer that kind of lie should mean they cannot be trusted.

If a North Korean dissenter is using their services and they are keeping records of transactions the dissenter's life along with their contacts life's may be in danger if someone friendly to Kim jun un can access this information.

[Gleb Gamow]

Having never used their service, are you telling me that they require a username stored on their platform? If that's the case, this entity is looking more and more like a front organization each passing day. Put another way, if Bitmixer isn't a CIA et al. operation, then they prove how inept they are, for there's no way in hell a 3-LA should've missed the boat by not setting up a like venture for the purpose of gleaning whatever the fuck it is they glean.

@CIA: I don't really live a van with four flat tires on the banks of the Colorado River. I live in Josh Zerlan's basement. Come and get me. 

Lol.

Well they say they send you a PGP signed message so I suppose they have to send it somewhere.  Maybe that's a "username".  For the record, I've never used the service either.  Not saying I wouldn't use it.  Maybe I would.

To be clear, I'm not saying that they may go rogue someday, always a slight possibility, just that according to my findings still disproven, a nefarious actor obfuscating the source of their loot may not necessarily be protected on this site. On second thought, why the fuck do I even care? Surely, such a 3-LA-backed entity would bode well for the crypto space, eh?

I think the question is more 'are they lying about deleting customer information' verses 'are they going to go rogue'. Especially when dealing with a sensitive type of business like a mixer that kind of lie should mean they cannot be trusted.

If a North Korean dissenter is using their services and they are keeping records of transactions the dissenter's life along with their contacts life's may be in danger if someone friendly to Kim jun un can access this information.

That's a very valid concern, eclipsing my example(s).

[BurtW]

Now we know why they closed up shop: Bruno's questions.

[Gleb Gamow]

Now we know why they closed up shop: Bruno's questions.

It was a really very hard decision. Especially it was hard to drop this business because of incredible high income. But we never had any government or legal pressure, it is only my own opinion. I really believe in clean transparent Bitcoin. I really happy that Bitcoin legalized as payment system and currency in many countries, I actually didn't believe in this in 2011.

If my contention has validity, exactly how does a 3-LA administer government or legal pressure to itself? Disclosure: To borrow the phrase, it is only my opinion.

Thanks, Burt. I'm reading the rest of their new thread now: https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=2042470.0 (created three days ago; I missed it).

[babo]

To be clear, I'm not saying that they may go rogue someday, always a slight possibility, just that according to my findings still disproven, a nefarious actor obfuscating the source of their loot may not necessarily be protected on this site. On second thought, why the fuck do I even care? Surely, such a 3-LA-backed entity would bode well for the crypto space, eh?

i agree with you man, you are right
i dont understand the close, if they are security proof.. is very strange

[Gleb Gamow]

To be clear, I'm not saying that they may go rogue someday, always a slight possibility, just that according to my findings still disproven, a nefarious actor obfuscating the source of their loot may not necessarily be protected on this site. On second thought, why the fuck do I even care? Surely, such a 3-LA-backed entity would bode well for the crypto space, eh?

i agree with you man, you are right
i dont understand the close, if they are security proof.. is very strange

The CEO closed the site because his pastor said so.  My pastor told me that steel buildings can collapse due to isolated fires, fires burning important docs not found anywhere else on Earth. My other pastor owns a pizza joint that has a basement where pizzas are served, with patrons killing the pizzas. Meanwhile, Arkancide is still a thing.

Don't even get me started on the Goldman Sachs / Satoshi connection. Hint: Robert Mercer & Steve Bannon.

[Rana590]

Is it 100% safe or not?
Looking very good but i wanna know details.
And what is the benefits of being a member of it?
Thank you dear

[Gleb Gamow]

Is it 100% safe or not?
Looking very good but i wanna know details.
And what is the benefits of being a member of it?
Thank you dear

Just goes to show that some people don't have a fuckin clue as to which way it up. I doubt if Rana even read more than the first paragraph of the OP, let alone going to the end of the thread to learnt MORE FUCKIN DETAILS!

[BurtW]

Is it 100% safe or not?
Looking very good but i wanna know details.
And what is the benefits of being a member of it?
Thank you dear

Piece of shit signature spamming asshole.

[Stanni]

Why exit scam? Do you really need it?
Will I ever get my $ 350 in BTC? ..that's not a little money for me.
Does anyone know who the former operator of bitmixer.io is?

~Stanni

[Quickseller]

Why exit scam? Do you really need it?
Will I ever get my $ 350 in BTC? ..that's not a little money for me.
Does anyone know who the former operator of bitmixer.io is?

~Stanni

Do you still have the signed message you got when you received the address to send money to?

[Stanni]

Why exit scam? Do you really need it?
Will I ever get my $ 350 in BTC? ..that's not a little money for me.
Does anyone know who the former operator of bitmixer.io is?

~Stanni

Do you still have the signed message you got when you received the address to send money to?

Signed message? What do you mean exactly? I have the bitmixer code.

[TryNinja]

Signed message? What do you mean exactly? I have the bitmixer code.

The letter of guarantee they ask you to download when you start mixing your coins.

BitMixer has been gone for a long time (they announced they were closing, so no exit scam). You probably didn't know that and fell for a fake version of the mixer.