Binance Hackers Bombard Chipmixer to Launder at Least 4,836 BTC

[stompix]

So for few bucks you earn from your signature campaign, you are ready to personally attack members to defend your campaign so would you ready to even take the blame if they turn out to be criminals?

Your website (as you now talk like you own it) is involved in a criminal activity so don't defend it blindly. What I do is none of your concern as I don't support criminals nor will go to the extent you went. You want to launder money, you do it but when you get caught, you can't blame the Government because you want to PROTECT YOUR PRIVACY.

I thought you were a decent member to talk to but sorry to say you can't even talk properly.

So, an unknown firm claims some coins went to chipmixer with zero real proof and you claim that the website is involved in criminal activity ?
And we should shut down the mixers for this...

Well, I have some bad news from you., we should shut down the entire system because the ones that hacked binance claim something else:

CoinDesk’s interaction with Platon first began in July, when we began reporting on the movement of bitcoins stolen in the May breach of Binance.
Platon alleges the stolen coins were held in a wallet hosted by bitcoin software wallet provider Blockchain, the maker of the recently launched PIT exchange.
By following a trail leading from this wallet, Platon discovered that the hackers had laundered 2,000 bitcoins though Bitmex, Yobit, KuCoin, and Huobi and were looking to convert as much as $1 million in bitcoin per day.

So, who to close down first, blockchain huobi , kucoin yobit , bitmex or chipmixer?

What the heck are these posts?

Well, some people think that we should have kyc on the forum, kyc when you buy coins, kyc when you use the toilet...
So, there you have it!

[1715406125]

1715406125

[1715406125]

1715406125

[1715406125]

1715406125

[1715406125]

1715406125

[1715406125]

1715406125

[figmentofmyass]

If anything, this just shows how ChipMixer is legit. If they got almost 5k BTC in deposits and didn't run away with the money, then we can easily say they have good intentions.

i'm not worried in the least about that. the issue at hand seems more about fungibility. if someone flooded chipmixer with the binance hack outputs, it stands to reason that those outputs are being recirculated to other chipmixer users. where does that leave them, with ciphertrace at al watching every move?

tbh i don't care from an ethical standpoint---i take the position that if you can't protect your coins, they deserve to be stolen. mix them, spend them in good health.....i don't care. i just think people are understandably concerned that they're gonna be clocked by third party services for spending coins associated with that event. (yes i know they are entirely different outputs now, just not sure how blockchain analysis companies are viewing this and therefore how exchanges are reacting to related user deposits)

i'll be avoiding KYC services with chipmixer derived funds, at least for now.

[bob123]

So for few bucks you earn from your signature campaign, you are ready to personally attack members to defend your campaign so would you ready to even take the blame if they turn out to be criminals?

Personal attacks ? Where ?

The whole thinking of dirty and clean coins simply does not work. There are no 'coins'. That's the point.

And i would defend any reputable business which is being attacked by people who don't know the technical details of bitcoin and therefore making wrong accusations.

Your website (as you now talk like you own it) is involved in a criminal activity so don't defend it blindly. What I do is none of your concern as I don't support criminals nor will go to the extent you went. You want to launder money, you do it but when you get caught, you can't blame the Government because you want to PROTECT YOUR PRIVACY.

No, i do not own that business.

So, in your eyes.. everyone who cares about his privacy is a criminal ? That's some weird logic.

I thought you were a decent member to talk to but sorry to say you can't even talk properly.

I am able to argue properly.
All i see in this section of the forum is some heavy misunderstanding on how bitcoin works. And this leads to wrong conclusions.
Whether it is how BTC technically works or how everyone caring about his privacy is a criminal. That's just plain stupid.

Earlier it was said here that there are some efforts to increase the anonimity of Bitcoin. But I'm not sure it's possible.
At the begininig we had bigger anonimity and that didn't last. With high pressure for regulation I don't think that turning back at the starting point is actually possible. And wouldn't be very good for reputation of Bitcoin either.

That's definitely possible.
Bitcoin never had any anonymity. Bitcoin was (and is) pseudonymous.

But with future improvements, BTC can definitely be a more private coin. I am not talking about full anonymity, but about enough anonymity to not get spied on by your neighbor or the store next block.

Silly argument, most money even in fiat is not physical and there can be dirty money that has never left anything but a representation in accounts, this is not something new to the crypto world and not something we should think will require its own unique answer, this has already happened.

My point is still valid.
It is simply not possible to distinguish between clean and dirty 'coins' (coins do not exist in BTC) after mixing.

Instead of simply stating 'silly argument', what about explaining how you would distinguish between them in the example i gave earlier ?

[imstillthebest]

Chipmixer should have been told in advance by Binance which addresses to flag.

They have done that . not only on chipmixer but also on other mixing service but how can the mixers know if the btc came from binance hacking ?  Also , mixers are still going to accept any btc and they wont care if the coins came from illegal or not     .

Many mixers have been shut down on the past  and i think one of those reasons why is because of the crypto/btc laundering .

[hv_]

Silly argument, most money even in fiat is not physical and there can be dirty money that has never left anything but a representation in accounts, this is not something new to the crypto world and not something we should think will require its own unique answer, this has already happened.

My point is still valid.
It is simply not possible to distinguish between clean and dirty 'coins' (coins do not exist in BTC) after mixing.

Instead of simply stating 'silly argument', what about explaining how you would distinguish between them in the example i gave earlier ?

what I am saying is that this isn't a uniquely crypto thing, fiat has plenty of transactions that are all digital and try to have laundering. Dirty fiat dollars that aren't physical have been mixed with non physical clean fiat dollars as well. What I am saying is there is no reason to argue about this and we should just look at what is implemented currently by the financial sector as it's already been discussed and decided on by them at length.

Yes - and again: the burden to prove clean history is just there, because it is doable with not MUCH effort and also because tooo many dumb shit already happened within CRYPTO per se - that's the Price now all have to pay

[Juggy777]

What the heck are these posts? ChipMixer is obviously NOT going to cooperate and it's not like the government can "wake up" next day and say "yo, let's shutdown this mixer" that easily. Bestmixer was clearly acting over-confident with all their "best mixing algo" bullshit and "exchange/mining only funds" (and charging a lot of money in fees for that). They were a lot of marketed words and no real security/privacy. Their case has nothing to do with ChipMixer.

If anything, this just shows how ChipMixer is legit. If they got almost 5k BTC in deposits and didn't run away with the money, then we can easily say they have good intentions.

Chipmixer will not be shutting down because they’re not guilty, even if the government wishes to shut them down they’ll have to first check under which jurisdiction it falls and then pass a order against it which of course can be challenged. To be fair Chipmixer owes no explanation to anyone they did their service the best way they could they received those coins, and they processed it as any other routine transaction it’s sheer bad luck those turned out to be hacked coins. @TryNinja you’re absolutely correct Chipmixer is legit, and by honestly completing this transaction Chipmixer has proven it can be trusted with any amount.

[serjent05]

Chipmixer will not be shutting down because they’re not guilty, even if the government wishes to shut them down they’ll have to first check under which jurisdiction it falls and then pass a order against it which of course can be challenged. To be fair Chipmixer owes no explanation to anyone they did their service the best way they could they received those coins, and they processed it as any other routine transaction it’s sheer bad luck those turned out to be hacked coins. @TryNinja you’re absolutely correct Chipmixer is legit, and by honestly completing this transaction Chipmixer has proven it can be trusted with any amount.

In our thought that should be the norm.  But the authority often time being rude to the extent of wicked, is not that considerate.  They can create scenarios and issues that can setup anyone to look suspicious.  In short they can stage a conspiracy to be able to execute their full control towards a scenario.  Pushing the idea of "being used to launder money" is enough for them to escalate the issue and shutdown anyone.  I just hope this will not happen to Chipmixer.

[erikalui]

Personal attacks ? Where ?

The whole thinking of dirty and clean coins simply does not work. There are no 'coins'. That's the point.

And i would defend any reputable business which is being attacked by people who don't know the technical details of bitcoin and therefore making wrong accusations.

You clearly said people like me sell KYC details for $20 for some shitcoins just because you want to support a site that supports money laundering. I don't know what was the reason you had to make a remark about what I do as that's not your concern.

Tainted cryptocoins' concept does exist even though they are difficult to trace but it's not impossible. You can choose to believe or ignore it it's your wish.

No, i do not own that business.

So, in your eyes.. everyone who cares about his privacy is a criminal ? That's some weird logic.

I never wrote you are a criminal or anyone who cares about privacy too. I only said that Chipmixer appears shady by being involved (if proved) in this money laundering which means it's involved in a criminal activity. Tomorrow other hackers/criminals will use the website and Chipmixer will still be safe according to the forum members is a weird logic as nobody is above the law. Exchanges have shut down for not complying with KYC/AML policies so I don't think Chipmixer too would be able to run smoothly if they get involved in such shady deals. And that's my opinion ONLY.

I am able to argue properly.
All i see in this section of the forum is some heavy misunderstanding on how bitcoin works. And this leads to wrong conclusions.
Whether it is how BTC technically works or how everyone caring about his privacy is a criminal. That's just plain stupid.

Caring about individual privacy is separate as you are not a business. Here the main subject is Chipmixer.

I said that people wouldn't use a mixer unless they want to launder money else paying extra fee just to avoid their coins from being traced but the point is that even these coins can be traced. Nothing is impossible. I did not call them criminals so don't change the meaning of my words as that's being stupid.

People who want to protect their privacy and who want to use mixers can do so at their own risk but that doesn't mean people like me who want to comply with rules as much as possible are stupid or fools or I don't care about privacy.

[darewaller]

Well, it is a good news and also a bad new, bad news in the sense that it would now be difficult for people to trust this chip mixer to convert their unanimous transaction into a private one which is its main purpose because I wonder how they could easily detect that it was hacked through chip mixer, and the good news about it is that gradually are getting to that stage where hackers can be detected easily, of them to have even known that this is what was used to launder such amount of btc from Binance.

I wonder why chip mixer too would allow such transaction to take place within their services without investigating, if the close chip mixer now, that would be sad news and at the same time bring regulation to the cryptocurrency industry.

[Mahanton]

Is there any word from Chipmixer yet about this issue? I do read almost response on here.Some saying they wont got affected and some do say that they are on a big trouble.
For me I don't see for Chipmixer to oppose if government would something ask about their cooperation connected to the incident.

[pixie85]

Is there any word from Chipmixer yet about this issue? I do read almost response on here.Some saying they wont got affected and some do say that they are on a big trouble.
For me I don't see for Chipmixer to oppose if government would something ask about their cooperation connected to the incident.

They won't oppose but the main argument here is that they are anonymous and won't get caught. It will depend on where their business is located. TPB managed to avoid being taken down for years by switching servers from country to country but eventually the government got them.

Chipmixer can be anonymous and keep their clients private now but they won't be able to hide forever and continue to operate the business. There are fees and taxes. They aren't located on no man's land.

[Artemis3]

They won't oppose but the main argument here is that they are anonymous and won't get caught. It will depend on where their business is located. TPB managed to avoid being taken down for years by switching servers from country to country but eventually the government got them.

Chipmixer can be anonymous and keep their clients private now but they won't be able to hide forever and continue to operate the business. There are fees and taxes. They aren't located on no man's land.

They got the founders, but the service still operates. They could survive if they were fully anonymous, but it is tricky to do that right.

[bob123]

You clearly said people like me sell KYC details for $20 for some shitcoins just because you want to support a site that supports money laundering. I don't know what was the reason you had to make a remark about what I do as that's not your concern.

And that's a personal attack ?

Tons of people here give sell their KYC for even less than 20$ (not in BTC, but in worthless tokens).

A mixer is there to give people privacy. To break the link between UTXO's. While it can be abused by criminals, that doesn't man that it is a bad concept.
Hell, cash is also being abused by criminals.. and still we are using it. Same applies to medicine.

Tainted cryptocoins' concept does exist even though they are difficult to trace but it's not impossible. You can choose to believe or ignore it it's your wish.

So.. please give me an example.
All you do is to allege it is possible, but you can't even 'trace' my simple example:

1 dirty UTXO: A
1 clean UTXO: B

Transaction:
A (1 BTC)+ B (1 BTC)  -->  C (0.5 BTC) + D (0.5 BTC) + E (0.5 BTC) + F (0.5 BTC)

Now, please tell me.
Which UTXO's are clean and which are dirty after this transaction ?


If you can't even answer this question for such a simple example, stop claiming it is possible the way you describe.

I said that people wouldn't use a mixer unless they want to launder money else paying extra fee just to avoid their coins from being traced but the point is that even these coins can be traced.

You do realize that ChipMixer does not take any fee ?
It is completely Pay what you want.

You keep on claiming things without even properly understanding the technical details of bitcoin.
Generally tracing UTXO's is possible yes. But if properly mixed, there is no link between pre- and post-mixing. And if the user isn't super retarded, there won't be a possibility to further trace the money.

[stompix]

I said that people wouldn't use a mixer unless they want to launder money else paying extra fee just to avoid their coins from being traced but the point is that even these coins can be traced. Nothing is impossible.

Seriously, you really believe that?
I use mixers and I actually paid taxes for my crypto earning this year.

Do you know why I use mixers? Exactly for privacy!
Because I don't want to buy a cup of coffee and have the barista see I have 2 or 5 BTC in my wallet.
I don't want to go and sell a guy some bitcoins and have him find out I have more than 10k in my accounts.

Let's not even talk about this situation:
https://www.thesun.co.uk/news/5665849/meet-the-strippers-tattooed-with-barcodes-so-sneaky-punters-can-tip-in-bitcoin-without-their-partner-finding-out/

Anyone could then link your address to their codes and then find out a lot more about you.

I did not call them criminals so don't change the meaning of my words as that's being stupid.

Yes, you just did, you called me and everyone using a mixer a criminal, as money laundering is a crime!

People who want to protect their privacy and who want to use mixers can do so at their own risk but that doesn't mean people like me who want to comply with rules as much as possible are stupid or fools or I don't care about privacy.

It actually means that you have no right to try to tell me how I use my money and what services I use as long as I don't do anything illegal.
Is asking the cashier to change a 100 bill to 2 50 euros bill a crime?
Cause by your f logic is still is.

[btctaipei]

rofl... Blockchain analysis against chipmixer would not be really useful if Skilled chipmixer user practice good mixing and coin control discipline.  Such type of chipmixer user would easily make any blockchain analysis moot.  Article uses flow based / side channel based analysis and were somewhat flawed, for the follow simple reasoning and case study:

1) an anonymous minded bitcoin user (User A) deposit a small portion (how small? see 5) with multiple portion of 4836 BTC into chipmixer, withdraw (at step 3) all the private keys, importprivkey to his/her wallet and did rescanblockchain 550000 on into x number of private key

2) User A then do nothing other than peek into mempool and when it's small, send each chip separately into address generated by getnewaddress() bech32 to minimize fees and speed up transaction in the future.

3) User A limit the chip size to approx 4 btc, with majority of chips ranging between 1btc to 256mbtc for better blockchain obfuscation and decreases the selectivity that may easily be identified using flow based analysis

4) User A realized that should x be rather large and were denominated into chip of various sizes, it is unlikely she would need to send output to any addresses with change; further more,

5) User A realized by amortize each payment amount in btc carefully to avoid detection, based on observed chipmixer intput / output histogram / distribution it would further obfuscate and make future payment impossible to correlate to the very large input.

[Vishnu.Reang]

Future outlook is quite bleak for Chipmixer. Even if they co-operate with the authorities, the chances are that they will be forced to close down. In fact it surprises me that the authorities allowed them to operate until now. If I am not wrong, they have been operating for more than two years and that makes them the oldest Bitcoin mixer that is currently active.

[TryNinja]

Future outlook is quite bleak for Chipmixer. Even if they co-operate with the authorities, the chances are that they will be forced to close down. In fact it surprises me that the authorities allowed them to operate until now. If I am not wrong, they have been operating for more than two years and that makes them the oldest Bitcoin mixer that is currently active.

TIL ChipMixer is only up today because the government lets them stay up.

[Reid]

Well then, it just proves that Chipmixer is really working if they cannot trace a single thing about it.
Let us not put it all with that company, some of the exchanges are also being used as a way to escape this kind of hacked coins specially DEX's or maybe some local ones with no KYC until you hit a number where they need to submit some information in regards for the Money Laundering Act.

I will follow this and if there is really no trail then I would be using Chipmixer myself and maybe I could also offer it to some people in the crypto space.  
This is not Chipmixer problem anymore hence, it is Binance who have lowered their defense.

[Artemis3]

Future outlook is quite bleak for Chipmixer. Even if they co-operate with the authorities, the chances are that they will be forced to close down. In fact it surprises me that the authorities allowed them to operate until now. If I am not wrong, they have been operating for more than two years and that makes them the oldest Bitcoin mixer that is currently active.

Do you even know where its physically located? Under what jurisdiction it would fall in? There are still plenty of places where Bitcoin is unregulated, therefore it doesn't exist from a legal standpoint. Think, game money, or game items. They don't "exist", yet there is people out there willing to pay real money for those particular bits of information.

See, if they fall into one of these countries, no one can order them do anything.

[LeGaulois]

^Your reasoning failed the moment I saw your signature and this comment.

In the end, it will make ChipMixer's reputation stronger and attract more people who are used to use BTC tumblers.

Glad you admitted that being involved in such shady businesses helps promote their reputation.

My speech would be the same even without my signature, even if it was a competitor site in my sig. But that wasn't about me, but about you. I tried to make it short so you get the point but you didn't.
You also used Liberty Reserve, a payment processor owned by scammers that helped scammers to scam more. So as you see it's not because a website/service can be used to scam that every user is a scammer.

The funny thing is if I invited you to the restaurant and offered you a handbag you wouldn't say no. Despite I paid with mixed coins  
(Just teasing)