ㅤ

[nc50lc]

The whole concept of bitcoin is to be anonymous so if this can benefit that goal, why not.

Uhm, no, Bitcoin isn't anonymous in the first place, why would it be the concept?

Then read the Bitcoin white paper again, section 10 Privacy.

So if "Privacy" is the title of Section 10, it will be the "whole concept" of Bitcoin?
It's just showing the level of privacy gained in using Bitcoin over the traditional payment systems and the options to improve it.
If we're going through sections, I'd go for the "introduction" and "conclusion" for the concept.

BTW, I'm not with those who said that "CoinJoin or mixing are useless".
Of course, it benefits the users.

[1713950115]

1713950115

[DireWolfM14]

2. Local copy of the blockchain? It's like a blockchain because... Is it a copy? Where did you see it?
- If in Win10, then along the path C:\Users\_yourname_\AppData\Roaming\WalletWasabi\Client\BitcoinStore\ - there are 2 folders with a copy of the blockchain for the main and test networks

I think you might be confused about this, Wasabi should not be downloading the whole blockchain, that's handled by bitcoin core.  If you have a full, un-pruned bitcoin node the blockchain directory will be found in C:\Users\<your_user_name>\AppData\Roaming\.bitcoin\blocks\.  As n0nce mentioned, the RPi OS is based on Linux, the data will be found in /home/<your_user_name>/.bitcoin/blocks/.  The data for Wasabi should also default to the home user's directory.  It may be in a hidden directory, use the command "ls -la" to see all the directories, including the hidden ones.

3. What are you trying to achieve?
- I want to send test coins to wallets that are in the test network, check the operation of these mechanisms

If you need testnet coins, there are plenty of faucets out there.  I've used testnet-faucet.mempool.co a few times.  

[dkbit98]

For Raspberry Pi 4 Model B (8GB) will there be assembly or the device does not meet the technical requirements? Installing deb package didn't work...

You can't install 64 bit deb packages in Raspberry Pi that is usually 32 bit arm, but maybe you can find or make compatible Appimage for Wasabi. they are similar to portable applications used on wiNd0ws OS.
I think that I was able to run older Wasabi 1.0 like this on Rpi before, but you can always compile it yorself, or open request on Wasabi github page.  

Is the local copy of the blockchain a "cut" version of the blockchain? The size hints at this, but I would like to understand exactly?

You need to wait until wallet is synced, but that is not complete nor pruned bitcoin blockchain, just files that wallet needs to function.

Plz give me your wallets from the test network - leaving transactions for testing

Hmm... I really don't know what you mean by this.

[Hueristic]

Plz give me your wallets from the test network - leaving transactions for testing

Hmm... I really don't know what you mean by this.

IP harvesting?

[DrBeer]

1. For Raspberry Pi 4 Model B (8GB) will there be assembly or the device does not meet the technical requirements? Installing deb package didn't work...

If the .deb doesn't work, you will probably need to compile it yourself (or tell us what exactly failed / what the error messages are).

2. Is the local copy of the blockchain a "cut" version of the blockchain? The size hints at this, but I would like to understand exactly?

Yes, installing Wasabi won't download the whole blockchain. It probably uses SPV by default ('light mode').

Now, Wasabi Wallet users have the option of using the built-in Bitcoin Knots full node, connecting to a different full node, or running the wallet in "light" mode.

3. Wallet localization. Where is she set up?  The installation package contains folders with localization, but I did not find the wallet localization settings in the settings...

Localization usually refers to language. It's entirely possible that you can only choose it at install time and not afterwards in settings.

2. Local copy of the blockchain? It's like a blockchain because... Is it a copy? Where did you see it?
- If in Win10, then along the path C:\Users\_yourname_\AppData\Roaming\WalletWasabi\Client\BitcoinStore\ - there are 2 folders with a copy of the blockchain for the main and test networks

This is odd. Raspberry OS is Linux. And what tells you that what's in those folders are copies of the blockchain? Are there .dat files? If those folders are not almost 400GB in size, they're not copies of the blockchain.

Many thanks for the logical answer to the questions!
1. I will try to compile under RaspberryOS, I will write off the results. In fact, I was also interested in the minimum resource requirements, and the features of the hardware platform. Let me explain what exactly - for example, when testing a node for Symbol / NEM, it turned out that a processor is required to support a certain set of instructions, and the Intel J series processor, which has limitations, cannot support the operation of the node.

2. Thank you, my assumptions were confirmed

3. Localization, in many products now involves a dynamic change in the interface language from the settings. It seems logical to me! Moreover, judging by the sources, localization packages are present. The only question left is to make it possible to change the language of already installed software in the settings

4. I haven’t launched it on the Linux platform (RaspberryOS), see point 1. I’ll try to launch it on Odroid H2 +, then I’ll tell you where and how much the blockchain data is

Plz give me your wallets from the test network - leaving transactions for testing

Hmm... I really don't know what you mean by this.

IP harvesting?

What about the meaning? I'm doing software testing, not collecting private data. Moreover, the use of TOR complicates the identification of real IP addresses.

[ABCbits]

For Raspberry Pi 4 Model B (8GB) will there be assembly or the device does not meet the technical requirements? Installing deb package didn't work...

You can't install 64 bit deb packages in Raspberry Pi that is usually 32 bit arm, but maybe you can find or make compatible Appimage for Wasabi. they are similar to portable applications used on wiNd0ws OS.
I think that I was able to run older Wasabi 1.0 like this on Rpi before, but you can always compile it yorself, or open request on Wasabi github page.  

Raspberry Pi 4B use 64-bit ARM SoC. The problem probably are,
1. The website only show .deb file for x86_64. But arm64 available at their GitHub release page[1]
2. OP download Raspberry Pi[2] OS long time ago where they offered 32-bit OS by default. It took some time until they offer 64-bit version[3].

[1] https://github.com/zkSNACKs/WalletWasabi/releases
[2] https://www.raspberrypi.com/software/
[3] https://www.phoronix.com/scan.php?page=news_item&px=Raspbian-OS-64-bit

[n0nce]

For full transparency: icopress contacted me and he kindly offered me to send him a concise list of questions which he'd directly forward to the Wasabi CEO.
I'm partly speculating myself in this thread, but also gave Wasabi the benefit of the doubt in some cases and generally try to be as objective as I can. Therefore I thoroughly read everything you guys are writing and will summarize a list with the 'top questions'..

Alright, everybody; I'm publishing here a list of 24 questions that was sent to Wasabi CEO (I'm actually not 100% who that currently is). It took me a few hours to go through most of the pages in this thread and summarize all of the 'core issues' and questions that came up. It still got pretty long, and I believe if we get answers to all of these, the answers will also explain other questions that did not make the list. I also told icopress that they don't have to answer everything; but that the whole list will be published, so afterwards we know what was answered and what wasn't. I hope everyone's happy with the list and that I didn't miss anything big.

• Who is your target audience / target user demographic? Due to the recent changes, we must assume it's people who are interested in mixing coins, while at the same time not having a problem with the mixer discriminating between UTXOs. Mixing with a blacklist seems like an oxymoron to us and we struggle to see the use case.
• Related to point 1, we found comments on your own Twitter profile from presumably former Wasabi users, like:

  What's the point of a washing machine that only washes clean laundry?

  - do you have a response for that?
  
• Is it correct that you now officially focus on institutional investors and chose to implement a blacklist for this reason? Your blog post and other statements make it seem like this is the case. For example in this interview: https://stephanlivera.com/episode/364/, Max Hillebrand said: 'if you, as a CoinJoin coordinator, if you want to work with institutional clients, hedge funds, insurance funds, Michael Saylor, and all these people, well, even if ZKSnacks were not to be regulated, those customers might very well be, maybe because they're custodians of other people's money or whatnot. And then these regulated entities can only become users of a coordinator—arguably, I'm not sure—if such a blacklisting is involved.'
• If institutional investors are now your target audience, why didn't you communicate this openly and transparently - maybe even continued running Wasabi 1.0 for the vast majority of users, without all this tainting and blacklisting and explicitly stated that this 'Wasabi with blacklisting' is dedicated to such investors that are regulated and thus aren't allowed to use a mixer that has no blacklist?
• We believe:

  If Wasabi were actually being targeted by laws and regulations, then the correct course of action is to let all their users know about it, inform all their users how to mitigate it, explain to their users how to swap to a decentralized coordinator, create easy tutorials for people to set up and run their own coordinators, and shut down their centralized coordinator long before they are forced to start cooperating with blockchain analysis.

  Did you consider taking such a course of action instead of the pretty low-key Twitter announcement that got very little visibility and no changes to the website (front and docs page)?
  

• Why do the institutions of all people need to use CoinJoin on their assets in the first place? Do they have something to hide too?

  It seems odd that institutional investors want to use a mixing service; since they usually rather prefer to keep their Bitcoin investments in the hands of a broker / exchange or hold Bitcoin ETFs. Or are the 'institutional clients, hedge funds, insurance funds' trying to hide something from their customers?
  
• Your website still says:

  The aim of bitcoin is to be a decentralized digital currency, but if all users are eventually required to consult centralized blacklists before accepting bitcoin, then its decentralization will be destroyed.

  This stands in direct contrast to your blacklisting update. Has your opinion on blacklists changed or how is this view compatible with providing a Bitcoin anonymity service that only allows certain UTXOs to use it?
  
• WasabiWallet also states this; which we all agree with.

  If Bitcoin fungibility is too weak in practice, then it cannot be decentralized: if someone important announces a list of stolen coins they won't accept coins derived from, you must carefully check coins you receive against that list and return the ones that fail. Everyone gets stuck checking blacklists issued by various authorities because in that world we'd all not like to get stuck with bad coins. This adds friction and transactional costs and makes Bitcoin less valuable as money.

  - Now Chainalysis is the one providing such a list and you're asking them which UTXOs are on the list and which are acceptable. Don't you think you're helping set a precedent which may lead exactly to the scenario described, where everyone will be stuck checking blacklists upon blacklists, published by tons of different authorities, which will make Bitcoin less valuable as money? Are you now making Bitcoin less valuable as money?
  
• This statement on your website also strongly implies you are not censoring users, which you now clearly are doing.

  The only known possible 'malicious' actions that the server could perform are two sides of the same coin; Blacklisted UTXO's: Though this would not affect the users who are able to successfully mix with other 'honest/real' peers.

  In general, it seems like you intentionally never changed the website until the latest redesign (which didn't affect the docs page quoted here, though). Why was there so little communication around this huge update and everything kept so 'on the low'?
  
  (big credit to o_e_l_e_o for digging these out)
  
• Many users were puzzled about your very minimalistic Twitter announcement; and what the image is trying to convey isn't clear either. Was this intentional? Some of us speculate that you believe WasabiWallet to be something like a 'last glimmer of hope' for Bitcoin privacy or something like that, since it sounds like that in various interviews and Twitter voice calls, too. Or are you aware that other, even better solutions exist, especially for the people who need privacy the most?
  

  The alternative, discontinuing zkSNACKs would have set back Bitcoin privacy for decades. Blacklisting by the default coordinator, while undesirable, is a small price to pay for the future of Bitcoin's privacy.

  That's exactly why we introduced blacklisting: so we can continue to operate and users can still have privacy using Bitcoin.

  Wasabi Wallet 2.0 is decades ahead of other privacy solutions in Bitcoin.

  Such statements make it appear like you believe yours is the only privacy solution and that there is no privacy in Bitcoin without Wasabi. Would you confirm this? Actually, later you admit that LN has better privacy, so this already seems like a contradiction.
  
• We're talking about political refugees, government critics and investigative journalists for example; these are amongst the ones needing privacy the most (and therefore switching to Bitcoin in the first place). But in https://twitter.com/HillebrandMax/status/1537503087987937283, at 1:32:10, Aviv Milner says that 'the average person who's using the product especially if you're not in a situation where you're your life depends on it and there's a large government organization that's well funded that's looking to to find you and hunt you down if you're not in that extreme situation then wasabi provides an incredible amount of privacy'. So it means WasabiWallet is not the 'ultimate privacy solution' for Bitcoin after all; just maybe for 'getting a little privacy' or how should we call that? Someone who really, really needs actual privacy cannot rely on Wasabi then? What should they use in your opinion? On one hand, you say Wasabi is the only / best option for privacy, but then admit it doesn't provide enough privacy if someone's life depends on it; so what's the point of it all then? We don't believe privacy is something quantifiable; it's more a yes-or-no kind of deal. Either your UTXOs and transactions are private or they're not.
• We noticed your download numbers have almost collapsed since the blacklisting announcement; did you expect this and how does this reflect on the anonymity set? https://tooomm.github.io/github-release-stats/?username=zkSNACKs&repository=WalletWasabi
• Are there any insights on how you blacklist? Do you rely solely on the data from Chainalysis or do you pre- and / or post-process the data? Since we assume blacklists are used to block coins from illegal origins; which laws or rules are used to determine if an origin or past activity is legal or not? Since Bitcoin is a global currency tied to no nation in particular, it appears impossible to declare 'legality' in this context. For example, copyright laws differ widely across the world; or when it comes to anything sexual, some stuff is illegal in certain countries, but totally legal in others. How can a legal ground be found to determine which UTXOs are 'good' and which are prohibited?
• Are all UTXOs sent to Chainalysis for inspection, whenever someone wants to do a CoinJoin or only if after some pre-filtering you have some suspicion?
• Let's take an example: An investigative journalist uncovered a government or other wealthy entity's dirty secrets and now they're after them. People want to donate to the whistleblower or they want to spend their donations through WasabiWallet. However you get a notice to block those UTXOs, so you do exactly that; isn't this exactly the target audience? Isn't this exactly the person who needs a Bitcoin privacy solution? (This refers back to point 1). Don't you also go straight against Bitcoin's original goal of pseudonymous, fungible currency that can be received from and sent to anyone, anywhere, anytime? What's the use of a privacy solution if the ones needing privacy are not allowed to use it? (this refers back to point 2)
• We believe that starting censoring some users opens the door to censoring anybody and everybody. Would you agree with this?

  Again: Bitcoin is either censorship resistant, or it isn't. You cannot pick and choose who it is censorship resistant for. If you, like Wasabi, start censoring some users, then you open the door to censoring anybody and everybody

• Let's take a step back to the beginnings. Did you consider building something decentralized instead of the current coordinator model? As we can see now, it created a central point of failure.
• You already said this isn't the case; so you don't have to confirm or deny if this happened; but if we're being skeptic, we have to consider the idea that you were pressured by authorities after all, with an extra clause that you're not allowed to say anything about it. Did you ever consider that a privacy-enhancing service would sooner or later be targeted and pressured by authorities? Other similar services explicitly made sure from the beginning that the creators and developers are anonymous, pseudonymous or generally unknown, to make sure such pressure can't be exterted on the project. Actually, satoshi himself may have left Bitcoin to remove such a central point of failure (through pressure on the creator).
• Did you pay for this post? https://bitcoinmagazine.com/business/wasabi-wallet-2-contains-new-features-for-optimizing-bitcoin-coinjoins We wonder how it completely ignores the blacklisting update, given the generally bad reception by the (vocal, even on Twitter) community. There is no mention of collaboration between WasabiWallet and blockchain analysis companies.
• Another question quoted directly from the community:

  I'm also interested in the scenario (which will definitely happen sooner or later) where someone is allowed to mix their coins and then afterwards Wasabi decide that their inputs were tainted and they shouldn't have been allowed to mix them at all, since the document linked to above also invites you to inform them of any illegal transactions and states that they will fully cooperate with any investigations. Why would reporting an illegal transaction to Wasabi achieve anything at all, unless they have the ability to track those coins and are going to share that information with law enforcement?

• Automatic CoinJoin and the removal of manual UTXO selection altogether is a deal-breaker for some users (especially in the context of the whole update). We believe it's unexpected behaviour of a wallet to automatically (without user opt-in) send all of a user's UTXOs to a blockchain analysis company for vetting (whether blacklisted or not) and afterwards be mixed. Some users are worried that the very act of mixing makes the UTXO 'tainted' in the eyes of the exchange and that it will freeze those funds. By the way: this is exactly what you predicted in your old docs pages; if everyone starts coming up with 'taint definitions' and blacklists, using (moving) Bitcoin will become infeasibly cumbersome.
• Another quote from the same recent Twitter group chat: https://twitter.com/HillebrandMax/status/1537503087987937283 (at 1:32:40) - Aviv Milner says that 'Maybe there is a little more privacy in Lightning'; and elaborates that LN is tricky to use though, so he implies that Wasabi is actually less anonymous / less private than Lightning, but just easier to use? Would you confirm that, that Wasabi CoinJoin privacy is lower than Lightning privacy? So if I need the absolute most privacy, you would recommend to create a Lightning channel and / or doing a submarine swap instead of doing a WasabiWallet CoinJoin? This is practical, important information for a lot of users who need as strong privacy guarantees as possible.
• Right before, he also says that it's much more private than the vast majority of alternatives; what are those alternative privacy solutions that are much worse than WasabiWallet? Or did he talk about the 'alternatives' as non-privacy-promising, plain and normal non-custodial wallets, with no CoinJoin implementation in them; that these are less private?
• For the last point, we have an important observation:

  Wasabi Wallet doesn't utilize any post-mix spending tools, and if part of the users practices bad spending behavior (like spending directly to a centralized exchange), then the other part of the users (more advanced) can potentially be deanonymized in a process of elimination.

  If I recall correctly, this is also a potential issue / attack on other such mixing technologies; where bad behaviour (unintentional or even intentional) can put the privacy of other users at risk. This sounds like a loophole / security issue just looking to be exploited. Would you confirm this issues and if yes, are there any plans yet to improve this?
  

[DrBeer]

For Raspberry Pi 4 Model B (8GB) will there be assembly or the device does not meet the technical requirements? Installing deb package didn't work...

You can't install 64 bit deb packages in Raspberry Pi that is usually 32 bit arm, but maybe you can find or make compatible Appimage for Wasabi. they are similar to portable applications used on wiNd0ws OS.
I think that I was able to run older Wasabi 1.0 like this on Rpi before, but you can always compile it yorself, or open request on Wasabi github page.  

Is the local copy of the blockchain a "cut" version of the blockchain? The size hints at this, but I would like to understand exactly?

You need to wait until wallet is synced, but that is not complete nor pruned bitcoin blockchain, just files that wallet needs to function.

Plz give me your wallets from the test network - leaving transactions for testing

Hmm... I really don't know what you mean by this.

1. I agree, but .. Provided that the site would indicate that the deb package is x64. There are no clear clarifications on the site, which means that the package is most likely x86. Well, somehow it was accepted earlier in Debian.
From the Debian documentation, packages are marked:
i386 - x86 architecture, designed for Intel-compatible 32-bit processors (default unless otherwise specified)
amd64 - x86-64 architecture designed for Intel/AMD 64-bit processors
The installation package, on the site, is named: Wasabi-2.0.0.deb - in theory, by default, this is the i386 package....

2. A copy of the chain, as I have now figured out, is a "cut off" (thanks to the previous participant), part of the blockchain. By analogy with the "circumcision" of data in a classic bitcoin wallet. "Pruning blocks allows you to run a smaller version of the full blockchain. The function "prunes" blocks, removing old data that is no longer required when the last block chain is loaded." (c) Bitcoin wallet documentation.

3. I meant - if someone from the participants in this topic is testing a wallet in the test network - give me your addresses so that I can send transactions there. Nothing more

[n0nce]

2. A copy of the chain, as I have now figured out, is a "cut off" (thanks to the previous participant), part of the blockchain. By analogy with the "circumcision" of data in a classic bitcoin wallet. "Pruning blocks allows you to run a smaller version of the full blockchain. The function "prunes" blocks, removing old data that is no longer required when the last block chain is loaded." (c) Bitcoin wallet documentation.

There's an important distinction though; even if the end result (you only have a small part of the blockchain locally) may be similar, the implications are totally different.
Running a Bitcoin Core node in pruned mode, means you've downloaded and verified every single block from the genesis block (even though you've discarded everything but the last few GB) so you know that your UTXO set is fine, that all blocks correctly build upon the previous block and you generally don't need to trust anyone.
The one downside is that you do need to download and verify the whole blockchain once, which can take hours or days depending on the hardware.

I'm 100% sure that what Wasabi gives you by default is not a 'pruned node' in the classical sense (such as described above). This is not a jab against Wasabi - it's how 99% of wallets operate.

[tranthidung]

Running a Bitcoin Core node in pruned mode, means you've downloaded and verified every single block from the genesis block (even though you've discarded everything but the last few GB) so you know that your UTXO set is fine, that all blocks correctly build upon the previous block and you generally don't need to trust anyone.
The one downside is that you do need to download and verify the whole blockchain once, which can take hours or days depending on the hardware.

Pros and Cons of Bitcoin Node types (Full node and Prune node)

Both full nodes and prune nodes download the full blockchain. Even with prune node, you have to download a full blockchain at the first time but the difference is full node store all the blockchain in your disk but the prune node only store a small part of the blockchain, depends on the N parameter you set for it. It is like a rolling tactics when you don't have enough data storage space to store a whole blockchain or you don't want to do it, then Prune node will be your choice.

[o_e_l_e_o]

-snip-

Great effort. I'll obviously read and consider the answers as and when we get them, but given that we know Wasabi are quite happy to bend the truth or even outright lie (as we've seen from many examples in this thread), I'm not holding out much hope of honest answers to some of the more difficult questions.

I would encourage you to post the replies in a new topic for increased visibility and because I'm sure the discussion will generate many more pages of discussion.

[BlackHatCoiner]

[...]

Great. Can't look forward for the answers. I'm afraid we'll receive some arbitrary or disappointing responses to questions like:

Are there any insights on how you blacklist?

Did you ever consider that a privacy-enhancing service would sooner or later be targeted and pressured by authorities?

So it means WasabiWallet is not the 'ultimate privacy solution' for Bitcoin after all; just maybe for 'getting a little privacy' or how should we call that? Someone who really, really needs actual privacy cannot rely on Wasabi then? What should they use in your opinion?

Let's take an example: An investigative journalist uncovered a government or other wealthy entity's dirty secrets and now they're after them. People want to donate to the whistleblower or they want to spend their donations through WasabiWallet. However you get a notice to block those UTXOs, so you do exactly that; isn't this exactly the target audience? Isn't this exactly the person who needs a Bitcoin privacy solution?

Anyhow, it's good to keep things transparently. It'll take some time, though, and I'm sure they'll have to meet and discuss about it with Chainalysis. 

[PrivacyG]

This made my day!  Thank you for the questions, I am out of sMerits so someone please throw one or two at n0nce's post for me.  So glad my questions are in there as well.  Great job!

At this point.  If they say the truth or a bent one, I think it will be bad for Wasabi either way.  By telling the truth you are pushing everyone away from Wasabi right away and basically the definition of 'taint' starts to slowly dissolve, redeeming Wasabi's Coin Join useless.  The definition of 'taint' would dissolve so quickly if we get to be told institutions are the main users of Coin Join now, because if they can have something to hide it should be no problem for us to have anything to hide either.

But I would appreciate them telling the truth.  If they are going to lie, it is going to get worse I believe.  Because you just can not call us stupid right in our faces.  Or there is the third option, vague answers that answer nothing.  I hope it is not the third because if they give vague answers, we are surely going to hear and understand a lot more out of their silence than they wish we could.

-
Regards,
PrivacyG

[NotATether]

Everyone moving large amounts of money around has something to hide.  It's much better for the security of their clients and security of their own employees to keep things somewhat obfuscated.  I could see CoinJoin making it easier for a Madoff to cheat his investors, but as we know there's nothing preventing a another Madoff from cheating his clients using currently available financial tools to hide fiat transactions.

There may be an opportunity for someone to in the finance industry to abuse CoinJoin, but I'm not a fan of punishing the masses due to the abuses of the few.

As n0nce alluded, privacy is a human right, and legally speaking corporations have been declared to have similar rights being that they are a congregation of people conducting business as a common entity.

Still, if an institutional investor wants to use CoinJoin, they should be using a service ran by a company licensed by financial authorities i.e. SEC, since they are effectively a money-transmitting service.

It is questionable whether zkSNACKs have gotten the licenses required to provided the CoinJoins to institutional clients (because clearly the SEC does not want any more Madoffs running around the country) before partnering with the blockchain analysis companies.

[n0nce]

Running a Bitcoin Core node in pruned mode, means you've downloaded and verified every single block from the genesis block (even though you've discarded everything but the last few GB) so you know that your UTXO set is fine, that all blocks correctly build upon the previous block and you generally don't need to trust anyone.
The one downside is that you do need to download and verify the whole blockchain once, which can take hours or days depending on the hardware.

Pros and Cons of Bitcoin Node types (Full node and Prune node)

Both full nodes and prune nodes download the full blockchain. Even with prune node, you have to download a full blockchain at the first time but the difference is full node store all the blockchain in your disk but the prune node only store a small part of the blockchain, depends on the N parameter you set for it. It is like a rolling tactics when you don't have enough data storage space to store a whole blockchain or you don't want to do it, then Prune node will be your choice.

Yes, that's exactly what I said; but Wasabi does not contain a pruned node. It doesn't download and verify the full blockchain.

-snip-

Great effort. I'll obviously read and consider the answers as and when we get them, but given that we know Wasabi are quite happy to bend the truth or even outright lie (as we've seen from many examples in this thread), I'm not holding out much hope of honest answers to some of the more difficult questions.

I would encourage you to post the replies in a new topic for increased visibility and because I'm sure the discussion will generate many more pages of discussion.

Thanks Leo! I focused on getting in all the key questions, and putting them in a polite way to maximize chances of honest / truthful answers to as many questions as possible. Of course, they could always give false answers; but that's going to be something everyone must judge for themselves. I expect / hope especially the questions that reference something they said or hinted at already, to be truthfully confirmed.

That's a good idea; I'll do that once we get them!

[...]

Great. Can't look forward for the answers. I'm afraid we'll receive some arbitrary or disappointing responses to questions like:
[...]

I don't know! Especially the questions that are very specific and / or reference known material should be pretty easy to answer; it's just that it would provide some information in 'black on white', that is not as 'written in stone' as of right now (such as a side mention in a 3h group call).

But I would appreciate them telling the truth.  If they are going to lie, it is going to get worse I believe.  Because you just can not call us stupid right in our faces.  Or there is the third option, vague answers that answer nothing.  I hope it is not the third because if they give vague answers, we are surely going to hear and understand a lot more out of their silence than they wish we could.

I see it just like you. If it's a viable business decision to switch focus completely to institutional users, they should stand by it (with all the consequences) and provide this in black on white, openly. It's definitely possible that financially this is the best way forward for the company and that they can sustainably run it like that. But I'd like this to be openly communicated so that the old userbase knows about it.
Yes; regarding answers that are vague (or missing) - this was the exact reason why it was important to me to openly publish the whole list of questions. When the answer comes, everyone can see and judge by themselves, whether and which questions have been answered and which haven't.

[DrBeer]

For Raspberry Pi 4 Model B (8GB) will there be assembly or the device does not meet the technical requirements? Installing deb package didn't work...

You can't install 64 bit deb packages in Raspberry Pi that is usually 32 bit arm, but maybe you can find or make compatible Appimage for Wasabi. they are similar to portable applications used on wiNd0ws OS.
I think that I was able to run older Wasabi 1.0 like this on Rpi before, but you can always compile it yorself, or open request on Wasabi github page.  

Raspberry Pi 4B use 64-bit ARM SoC. The problem probably are,
1. The website only show .deb file for x86_64. But arm64 available at their GitHub release page[1]
2. OP download Raspberry Pi[2] OS long time ago where they offered 32-bit OS by default. It took some time until they offer 64-bit version[3].

[1] https://github.com/zkSNACKs/WalletWasabi/releases
[2] https://www.raspberrypi.com/software/
[3] https://www.phoronix.com/scan.php?page=news_item&px=Raspbian-OS-64-bit

Thanks for the tip, that's what I need. Now I will install a new x64 system, and I'm sure Wassabi's wallet will show itself perfectly on it! Now I'm still collecting Odroid H2 +, there will be Ubuntu 22.0.4 x64, I'll also check it.
And just in case, I'll ask you another question - are there any critical requirements for the processor platform of the wallet? I met a similar problem when testing the Symbol node, there were mandatory requirements for the processor, more precisely, for the set of instructions that it supports. It’s just that there are several more simple models of microcomputers at hand, I would like to test this wallet on them

[n0nce]

Thanks for the tip, that's what I need. Now I will install a new x64 system, and I'm sure Wassabi's wallet will show itself perfectly on it! Now I'm still collecting Odroid H2 +, there will be Ubuntu 22.0.4 x64, I'll also check it.
And just in case, I'll ask you another question - are there any critical requirements for the processor platform of the wallet? I met a similar problem when testing the Symbol node, there were mandatory requirements for the processor, more precisely, for the set of instructions that it supports. It’s just that there are several more simple models of microcomputers at hand, I would like to test this wallet on them

I'm still unsure why you want to install it, though (especially if you've read the 'open letter' kind of 24 question list I posted earlier).
Do you want to try it out because you participate in their signature campaign and you want to see what you're actually advertising for or what's the motivation?

I feel like ChipMixer or also CoinJoin through Sparrow (using Samourai coordinator) work pretty well and don't see the need to use a coordinator that is the first to officially work against Bitcoin goals by blacklisting coins and working with blockchain analysis firms.

[ABCbits]

And just in case, I'll ask you another question - are there any critical requirements for the processor platform of the wallet? I met a similar problem when testing the Symbol node, there were mandatory requirements for the processor, more precisely, for the set of instructions that it supports. It’s just that there are several more simple models of microcomputers at hand, I would like to test this wallet on them

I haven't tried Wasabi version 2, but AFAIK there's no specific processor requirement. But it looks like only begin to support arm64 recently[1], so it's possible you could encounter issue even after you download .deb for arm64 and use 64-bit OS.

[1] https://github.com/zkSNACKs/WalletWasabi/pull/8287
[2] https://github.com/zkSNACKs/WalletWasabi/issues/4051

[DrBeer]

Thanks for the tip, that's what I need. Now I will install a new x64 system, and I'm sure Wassabi's wallet will show itself perfectly on it! Now I'm still collecting Odroid H2 +, there will be Ubuntu 22.0.4 x64, I'll also check it.
And just in case, I'll ask you another question - are there any critical requirements for the processor platform of the wallet? I met a similar problem when testing the Symbol node, there were mandatory requirements for the processor, more precisely, for the set of instructions that it supports. It’s just that there are several more simple models of microcomputers at hand, I would like to test this wallet on them

I'm still unsure why you want to install it, though (especially if you've read the 'open letter' kind of 24 question list I posted earlier).
Do you want to try it out because you participate in their signature campaign and you want to see what you're actually advertising for or what's the motivation?

I feel like ChipMixer or also CoinJoin through Sparrow (using Samourai coordinator) work pretty well and don't see the need to use a coordinator that is the first to officially work against Bitcoin goals by blacklisting coins and working with blockchain analysis firms.

It is of interest to me, exclusively from a practical point of view - what this wallet is like, what functions it has. And yes - participation in the subscription has become a point of interest, because. I admit, I have not heard about this wallet before.

24 questions are interesting, everyone has the right to their opinion. But I do not consider the presence of a coordinator something out of the ordinary "creepy". This is most likely a tribute to fashion, and such is the scheme for implementing security. As I understand it, you see this as a restriction of freedoms, I see it - protecting users from dubious transactions. It's like a seat belt in a car - it kind of interferes with your free movement, but it helps to save your life.

I haven't tried Wasabi version 2, but AFAIK there's no specific processor requirement. But it looks like only begin to support arm64 recently[1], so it's possible you could encounter issue even after you download .deb for arm64 and use 64-bit OS.

[1] https://github.com/zkSNACKs/WalletWasabi/pull/8287
[2] https://github.com/zkSNACKs/WalletWasabi/issues/4051

Thanks for the information and tips, I will try to deploy the wallet on several different platforms

[n0nce]

24 questions are interesting, everyone has the right to their opinion. But I do not consider the presence of a coordinator something out of the ordinary "creepy". This is most likely a tribute to fashion, and such is the scheme for implementing security. As I understand it, you see this as a restriction of freedoms, I see it - protecting users from dubious transactions. It's like a seat belt in a car - it kind of interferes with your free movement, but it helps to save your life.

It's not about the presence of a coordinator. Wasabi had that for years and tons of community members used and trusted it.

The whole recent debacle is because of its Blacklisting update.

We do see blacklisting as a restriction of freedom and impediment of one of the core things that Bitcoin actually tries to achieve (being 'free as in freedom' money, which allows for indiscriminating money transfers from anyone to anyone, anytime, anywhere).
Blacklists are bad for everyone; as introduction and normalization of them will make Bitcoin totally unusable (as they themselves say on their website - hence my question) and thus worthless.

• Your website still says:

  The aim of bitcoin is to be a decentralized digital currency, but if all users are eventually required to consult centralized blacklists before accepting bitcoin, then its decentralization will be destroyed.

  This stands in direct contrast to your blacklisting update. Has your opinion on blacklists changed or how is this view compatible with providing a Bitcoin anonymity service that only allows certain UTXOs to use it?
  
• WasabiWallet also states this; which we all agree with.

  If Bitcoin fungibility is too weak in practice, then it cannot be decentralized: if someone important announces a list of stolen coins they won't accept coins derived from, you must carefully check coins you receive against that list and return the ones that fail. Everyone gets stuck checking blacklists issued by various authorities because in that world we'd all not like to get stuck with bad coins. This adds friction and transactional costs and makes Bitcoin less valuable as money.

  - Now Chainalysis is the one providing such a list and you're asking them which UTXOs are on the list and which are acceptable. Don't you think you're helping set a precedent which may lead exactly to the scenario described, where everyone will be stuck checking blacklists upon blacklists, published by tons of different authorities, which will make Bitcoin less valuable as money? Are you now making Bitcoin less valuable as money?