ㅤ

[BlackHatCoiner]

Do we actually need to establish the fact that WasabiWallet's pool = also its users?

This is just not true. What's good for Wasabi team('s pocket) is definitely not necessarily good for the users as well. Wasabi team can be bribed to blacklist, make changes to their wallet software, shut down the whole thing-- which might be good for nopara and his fellow devs, but not for those who want to utilize Wasabi Wallet.

So here's the question again: What protection do users get from blacklisting? Wasabi team gains the benefit to avoid shutting down from sanctions (if only there were any), or whatever; what do the users gain?

[1713915224]

1713915224

[1713915224]

1713915224

[1713915224]

1713915224

[1713915224]

1713915224

[Wind_FURY]

Do we actually need to establish the fact that WasabiWallet's pool = also its users?

This is just not true. What's good for Wasabi team('s pocket) is definitely not necessarily good for the users as well. Wasabi team can be bribed to blacklist, make changes to their wallet software, shut down the whole thing-- which might be good for nopara and his fellow devs, but not for those who want to utilize Wasabi Wallet.

I'll accept that there's always that risk, and that also opens a bigger debate that ALL other developers of mixers and protocols that obfuscate outputs can also be bribed. But that's for another topic.

But the point is, Wasabi's pool = users' outputs being mixed together.

So here's the question again: What protection do users get from blacklisting? Wasabi team gains the benefit to avoid shutting down from sanctions (if only there were any), or whatever; what do the users gain?

If only truly untainted outputs enter Wasabi's pool? Protection from government sanctions. As illustrated by Tornado's sanction, will exchanges and other services really accept all those outputs that can be connected to Tornado? I believe they will not take that risk.

You can debate that the government can still sanction Wasabi for anything. OK you might be right, it can. But my debate is about the trade offs. Either the users accept it, or not. Simple.

[ABCbits]

--snip--

Off-topic? Do we actually need to establish the fact that WasabiWallet's pool = also its users? I'm sorry, I thought you already understood that, and that we're on the same page in that matter.

I do not consider owner/operator of Wasabi CoinJoin coordinator as user. To be specific, i'm talking about Wasabi Wallet user who use CoinJoin feature.

But anyway, whether right or wrong, whether you agree or disagree, the point is nopara37 accepted the trade off, and the users also have a choice if they want to accept the trade off. Because anyone can use another mixer that doesn't blacklist outputs, or another team can run another coordinator that doesn't blacklist outputs.

I get the point, although i have to remind that,
1. Some user probably don't know about blacklist.
2. Most user doesn't even aware you can switch to different coordinator.

[Wind_FURY]

--snip--

Off-topic? Do we actually need to establish the fact that WasabiWallet's pool = also its users? I'm sorry, I thought you already understood that, and that we're on the same page in that matter.

I do not consider owner/operator of Wasabi CoinJoin coordinator as user. To be specific, i'm talking about Wasabi Wallet user who use CoinJoin feature.

But anyway, whether right or wrong, whether you agree or disagree, the point is nopara37 accepted the trade off, and the users also have a choice if they want to accept the trade off. Because anyone can use another mixer that doesn't blacklist outputs, or another team can run another coordinator that doesn't blacklist outputs.

I get the point, although i have to remind that,

1. Some user probably don't know about blacklist.
2. Most user doesn't even aware you can switch to different coordinator.

I believe that's a debate for another topic.

Plus to make myself and where I stand clear, I don't believe you are wrong in disagreeing in WasabiWallet's acceptance of taking the trade off, and blacklisting "tainted" outputs, or outputs used for "illegal transactions". I understand your debate in the matter because "taint" truly doesn't exist in the blockchain. BUT, with government sanctions on computer programs, services and public wallets, I'm merely making a point that it's up to the user/service if he/she/they want to accept those trade offs, or not.

[BlackHatCoiner]

truly untainted outputs

What the fuck. Truly untainted, based on who? By default, every output is "truly untainted", because bitcoins are fungible. That's what we're saying pages now.

Protection from government sanctions.

No. If 10 out of the 300 inputs that are used in CoinJoin are "tainted" according to the chain analysis company, they can't file a lawsuit to every user who's part of the CoinJoin, that's just nonsense. Zero protection there. That's probably why they're implementing blacklisting in the first place.

As illustrated by Tornado's sanction, will exchanges and other services really accept all those outputs that can be connected to Tornado? I believe they will not take that risk.

You're going off-topic again. Show me what protection do the users gain. The ability to send money to anti-privacy and pro-censorship services that treat bitcoin as non-fungible and enforce claptrap rules is irrelevant.

[n0nce]

So here's the question again: What protection do users get from blacklisting? Wasabi team gains the benefit to avoid shutting down from sanctions (if only there were any), or whatever; what do the users gain?

If only truly untainted outputs enter Wasabi's pool? Protection from government sanctions. As illustrated by Tornado's sanction, will exchanges and other services really accept all those outputs that can be connected to Tornado? I believe they will not take that risk.

It has been explained over and over again that Wasabi has no government blacklist. This means at the very best, they can make a 'best effort' attempt at preventing users from mixing their coins with criminal's coins if it was about protecting users.

Although the question remains; even in a perfect world (in a blacklist advocate's eyes) what happens if I get coins from a Wasabi mix that are tainted later?
Example:

• Assumption: Wasabi has access to government-accepted / -created list of scammers' addresses.
• Person A scams person B out of 1BTC and mixes that coin on Wasabi immediately. As the coin was sent by B to a fresh address that A just generated, it's not on any blacklist yet.
• Person A gets out 'clean' coins after a few minutes; meanwhile I'm in the same mix and get the scammed coins (still are not yet tainted).
• It takes person B at least a few hours if not weeks or months to bring the case to the police / to court and get the scammer's coins on the government blacklist.
• Now a few months have passed, I want to spend my supposed 'clean Wasabi coins' and they are blocked by the government, or I might get arrested, since I own coins coming from a theft.
• Profit ?

That's why the whole concepts makes absolutely no sense and left us all so confused. Even 24 questions and answers directly from Wasabi weren't able to satisfactorily explain the company's move.

[NotATether]

It has been explained over and over again that Wasabi has no government blacklist. This means at the very best, they can make a 'best effort' attempt at preventing users from mixing their coins with criminal's coins if it was about protecting users.

Although the question remains; even in a perfect world (in a blacklist advocate's eyes) what happens if I get coins from a Wasabi mix that are tainted later?
Example:

• Assumption: Wasabi has access to government-accepted / -created list of scammers' addresses.
• Person A scams person B out of 1BTC and mixes that coin on Wasabi immediately. As the coin was sent by B to a fresh address that A just generated, it's not on any blacklist yet.
• Person A gets out 'clean' coins after a few minutes; meanwhile I'm in the same mix and get the scammed coins (still are not yet tainted).
• It takes person B at least a few hours if not weeks or months to bring the case to the police / to court and get the scammer's coins on the government blacklist.
• Now a few months have passed, I want to spend my supposed 'clean Wasabi coins' and they are blocked by the government, or I might get arrested, since I own coins coming from a theft.
• Profit ?

That's why the whole concepts makes absolutely no sense and left us all so confused. Even 24 questions and answers directly from Wasabi weren't able to satisfactorily explain the company's move.

Oh, they won't bother blacklisting eenie weenie scammed coins (that is unfortunately how governments and perhaps Wasabi view them - it is sad that over 10 years of cyber bloodshed hasn't brought a single major regulation to prevent scams*), they only care about what Russia, Iran, and NK are using crypto for, or perhaps they only that they think it's all just a blanket scam and then proceed to criminalize holding all types of cryptocurrencies. In rare cases where they are a bit smart they decide to go after hacks as well. But nobody goes after street scammers. A police force is practically non-existant.

*I'm thinking more in terms of the CAN-SPAM act against spam - true, it requires most mailing list publishers to provide a real, physical address (even if it's just a PO Box), but there are mailing lists that can be self-hosted without any address requirements.

[Pmalek]

...it's all just a blanket scam and then proceed to criminalize holding all types of cryptocurrencies.

If I was a complete pessimist, I would say this is the ultimate goal 5, 10, or 20 years from now. Bitcoin gives you options and options give you freedom. If you have freedom, you are no longer as dependent on the government as you ideally should be. Ideally according to them.

When it all gets too much for them, the elites could just decide that crypto is the haven for drug traffickers, hackers, pedophiles, terrorists, enemies of the West (Russia, North Korea, whatever is popular at the time), etc. To protect our people, we have decided to make crypto illegal. You have 3 months to get rid of it or face sanctions. Since you like digital currencies, we were kind enough to create this better bitcoin that is controlled and regulated by us (your savior's and protectors). Spend it any way you, like but for your own safety we have integrated this freeze button to stop you from spending too much or any at all because we love you and value your financial stability.   

[o_e_l_e_o]

If only truly untainted outputs enter Wasabi's pool? Protection from government sanctions.

Even ignoring the very valid points BlackHatCoiner and n0nce have made above, there is absolutely no reason to think that this will provide protection from government sanctions. We have seen absolutely no mention from anyone - not from government, authorities, financial regulators, centralized exchanges, lending platforms, blockchain analysis firms, literally anyone - that once Wasabi start blacklisting and censoring that all outputs from Wasabi coinjoins will be treated as completely clean as if they have just been mined. And given what we know about what the government and authorities think about bitcoin and think about regular people having privacy, I think it is incredibly presumptive to expect this to happen.

The more likely out come is that you coinjoin with Wasabi, pay them to spy on you, feed your data to blockchain analysis companies, and then end up with coins which are treated as suspect by various exchanges anyway. Given that it took major exchanges like Binance and Coinbase years to figure out how to support SegWit or how to batch their withdrawals, are people really expecting them to be able to tell the difference between coins which came from a Wasabi coinjoin or a Samourai coinjoin?

[Wind_FURY]

truly untainted outputs

What the fuck. Truly untainted, based on who? By default, every output is "truly untainted", because bitcoins are fungible. That's what we're saying pages now.

Based on "them", and "their rules". If you were truly reading my posts, you would truly get the context of my posts.

Protection from government sanctions.

No. If 10 out of the 300 inputs that are used in CoinJoin are "tainted" according to the chain analysis company, they can't file a lawsuit to every user who's part of the CoinJoin, that's just nonsense. Zero protection there. That's probably why they're implementing blacklisting in the first place.

You would be technically correct, but "they" didn't care about that when "they" sanctioned Tornado Cash. And that was the point. What would happen to all of those outputs that went through Tornado Cash?

WasabiWallet took the decision to block outputs used in "illegal transactions" as defined by "them", as a way to avoid "them" from sanctioning Wasabi. It's the user's choice if he/she wants to take the trade off of using Wasabi, or not.

As illustrated by Tornado's sanction, will exchanges and other services really accept all those outputs that can be connected to Tornado? I believe they will not take that risk.

You're going off-topic again. Show me what protection do the users gain. The ability to send money to anti-privacy and pro-censorship services that treat bitcoin as non-fungible and enforce claptrap rules is irrelevant.

Did you get my point/debate, or are you trying not to? I don't know why many people are so provoked by the trade off taken by WasabiWallet, and its users.

n0nce, when you posted "WasabiWallet has no government blacklist", you mean they're not in a blacklist, is that correct?

[BlackHatCoiner]

Based on "them", and "their rules". If you were truly reading my posts, you would truly get the context of my posts.

Gonna write a truly satisfactory response then.

You would be technically correct, but "they" didn't care about that when "they" sanctioned Tornado Cash.

I'm more than that: There's absolutely no sign from governments and AML services that a Wasabi CoinJoin is the holly grail of bitcoin outputs. Just because they've hired one chain analysis company to tell them which outputs they've analyzed completely shadily and non-transparently, and have reached the conclusion that are likely, according to their undisclosed measures, to be suspicious, it doesn't mean the rest of the world thinks likewise.

What would happen to all of those outputs that went through Tornado Cash?

I honestly don't know how it works, don't know how reliable that was, and neither how they identified that the outputs come from Tornado Cash. I have never used Ethereum.

WasabiWallet took the decision to block outputs used in "illegal transactions" as defined by "them", as a way to avoid "them" from sanctioning Wasabi.

I'm afraid they'll just block lots of transactions, some of which are going to be "illegal", and leave it there. You can't know for sure they've avoided sanctioning, but they're doing fine so far by bootlicking the authorities' beloved analysis company.

It's the user's choice if he/she wants to take the trade off of using Wasabi, or not.

Ugh. Tradeoffs again.

[Wind_FURY]

You would be technically correct, but "they" didn't care about that when "they" sanctioned Tornado Cash.

I'm more than that: There's absolutely no sign from governments and AML services that a Wasabi CoinJoin is the holly grail of bitcoin outputs. Just because they've hired one chain analysis company to tell them which outputs they've analyzed completely shadily and non-transparently, and have reached the conclusion that are likely, according to their undisclosed measures, to be suspicious, it doesn't mean the rest of the world thinks likewise.

That's not the point, because it's all not about you, or what you believe, or all about the rest of the world. It's also about "them", and "their" policies. WasabiWallet merely took the decision to block "illegal transactions" as a preventive measure.

What would happen to all of those outputs that went through Tornado Cash?

I honestly don't know how it works,

It's a mixer.

don't know how reliable that was,

Probably reliable enough.

and neither how they identified that the outputs come from Tornado Cash. I have never used Ethereum.

Let's assume they can, and will. What would happen to all of those outputs that went to a sanctioned mixer?

WasabiWallet took the decision to block outputs used in "illegal transactions" as defined by "them", as a way to avoid "them" from sanctioning Wasabi.

I'm afraid they'll just block lots of transactions, some of which are going to be "illegal", and leave it there. You can't know for sure they've avoided sanctioning, but they're doing fine so far by bootlicking the authorities' beloved analysis company.

If you were nopara73, what decision would you make, that you believe, would be best for yourself, WasabiWallet, and its users?

I have my answer, I would like to hear yours first.

[BlackHatCoiner]

That's not the point, because it's all not about you, or what you believe, or all about the rest of the world.

So stop claiming that you gain protection. There's absolutely no guarantee that if you use Wasabi, you gain more protection as three-letter agencies are concerned.

Let's assume they can, and will. What would happen to all of those outputs that went to a sanctioned mixer?

I guess these addresses are considered tainted from most spying companies out there. They can still be emptied normally, even though I don't cross my fingers the ingenious developer team won't fork the chain, and invalidate these balances. They've done it before, they can do it now; they're pro-censorship.

If you were nopara73, what decision would you make, that you believe, would be best for yourself, WasabiWallet, and its users?

How about not acting childishly and portraiting Wasabi's CoinJoin as the best privacy protection technique that's currently available, as a start? Furthermore, I wouldn't have reached to the position wherein I would have to choose between being a corrupted individual abandoning the project's principles or shut down the whole thing. The moment I began working on such software, I'd have made sure I gain maximum privacy. Ultimately, I wouldn't working on it, because there are better alternatives, namely JoinMarket.

[ABCbits]

If you were nopara73, what decision would you make, that you believe, would be best for yourself, WasabiWallet, and its users?

I have my answer, I would like to hear yours first.

Assuming threat from government exist, i would make such decision.
1. Stop running CoinJoin/CJ coordinator on mainnet.
2. Let community run their own CJ coordinator. zkSNACKs only need to include list of CJ coordinator on Wasabi Wallet, where user can choose preferable CJ.
3. Letting user know risk and limitation of both Wasabi Wallet and CJ.
4. Focus on WabiSabi (CJ protocol) and WasabiWallet development.

[n0nce]

n0nce, when you posted "WasabiWallet has no government blacklist", you mean they're not in a blacklist, is that correct?

No, that is not correct. WasabiWallet has no access to a blacklist created, maintained and / or accepted / approved by a (which one?) government.
This means someone could easily be a criminal in the government's eyes, but not on Wasabi's blacklist. As they are simply not 'synced'. Wasabi has no access to government or law enforcement resources or information.

And what do you think about the scenario I walked you through, what would happen if they had such access? Because in my eyes, even then, their supposed goal (protecting users) wouldn't be achieved.

[o_e_l_e_o]

If you were nopara73, what decision would you make, that you believe, would be best for yourself, WasabiWallet, and its users?

I wouldn't blacklist.

There are so many better privacy projects out there that are not succumbing to these unknown "regulatory pressures" that Wasabi is claiming are being forced on them and them alone (despite them having the lowest volume of the three main coinjoin techniques, lower volume than many mixers, lower volume than many DEXs, and far lower volume than privacy coins). If projects such as Samourai, JoinMarket, ChipMixer, Bisq, LocalCryptos, Monero, and anything else which gives users as good or better privacy than Wasabi can continue unencumbered, then Wasabi can too. They simply choose not to.

[DireWolfM14]

If you were nopara73, what decision would you make, that you believe, would be best for yourself, WasabiWallet, and its users?

How about I list the things I wouldn't do if I were in nopara73's position:

I certainly wouldn't bite the hand that feeds me.
I wouldn't spread FUD by saying outlandishly stupid things like "keeping bitcoin fungible."
I wouldn't suffer from delusions of grandeur, and bill myself as the savior of bitcoin's fungibility.
I wouldn't fear my own shadow or use a made up excuse to suck-up to institutional investors and government jackals.

In other words, I don't give a fuck what nopara73 does with his coinjoin provider or his wallet.  He can stick it up his ass with all his deflections and grandiose dreams of becoming bigger than Microsoft.  He's a tool and and shyster.  If he cared about bitcoin he wouldn't be trying to sell it out to institutions and government regulators.  Bitcoin was invented to free us from those very entities who's asses he's kissing, and he can keep sucking butt, for all I care.  Nobody gives a rat's ass about him or his wallet, as has been demonstrated by Wasabi's dwindling downloads.  He's got no one to blame for that but himself.

[Wind_FURY]

That's not the point, because it's all not about you, or what you believe, or all about the rest of the world.

So stop claiming that you gain protection. There's absolutely no guarantee that if you use Wasabi, you gain more protection as three-letter agencies are concerned.

There are no guarantees, yes, but it doesn't change the whole point that there are more risks that WasabiWallet is merely trying to avoid by accepting the trade off by having their coordinator block outputs used in "illegal transactions".

Let's assume they can, and will. What would happen to all of those outputs that went to a sanctioned mixer?

I guess these addresses are considered tainted from most spying companies out there. They can still be emptied normally, even though I don't cross my fingers the ingenious developer team won't fork the chain, and invalidate these balances. They've done it before, they can do it now; they're pro-censorship.

There's some probability that it might be connected to your real identity, right? I believe for ordinary users, just avoid taking actions that would put him/her at risk.

If you were nopara73, what decision would you make, that you believe, would be best for yourself, WasabiWallet, and its users?

How about not acting childishly and portraiting Wasabi's CoinJoin as the best privacy protection technique that's currently available, as a start? Furthermore, I wouldn't have reached to the position wherein I would have to choose between being a corrupted individual abandoning the project's principles or shut down the whole thing.

The moment I began working on such software, I'd have made sure I gain maximum privacy. Ultimately, I wouldn't working on it, because there are better alternatives, namely JoinMarket.

Shutting down the whole thing would have been the best decision for me, but nopara37 accepted the trade off. Either users want to accept the trade off too, or use the more decentralized JoinMarket.

[o_e_l_e_o]

There are no guarantees, yes, but it doesn't change the whole point that there are more risks that WasabiWallet is merely trying to avoid by accepting the trade off by having their coordinator block outputs used in "illegal transactions".

The risks that you claim Wasabi are trying to avoid only exist because companies like Wasabi are enforcing them in the first place. Wasabi is part of the problem here, not part of the solution.

There's some probability that it might be connected to your real identity, right? I believe for ordinary users, just avoid taking actions that would put him/her at risk.

And how do we know what actions "put someone at risk" considering Wasabi have not revealed which blockchain analysis company they are paying to spy on you or what their criteria are? It sounds very much like you are saying "Well, just make sure you have nothing to hide, and then you'll have nothing to worry about."

[DireWolfM14]

Wasabi is part of the problem here, not part of the solution.

Agree 100%.  The fud and misinformation being spread by the Wasabi team is only meant as deflection.  Bitcoin may not be perfect, but it's hundreds of times better than any fiat on the planet.  Bitcoin's fungibility, however is perfect, so any "taint proclamation" is an effort to centralize the ability to determine which coins remain fungible.  It's not only short-sighted, it's down right sinister.

And how do we know what actions "put someone at risk" considering Wasabi have not revealed which blockchain analysis company they are paying to spy on you or what their criteria are?

Would it really matter which chain analysis provider was used?  Do any of them have any legitimate way of insuring their results are accurate?  What level of accuracy is expected?

Let's assume for a second that chain analysis data was being used as evidence in a court room; what level of accuracy would be expected to refer to the data as anything but circumstantial?  It's a rhetorical question; it would need to be verified as 100% accurate for it be considered anything but circumstantial.  But what accuracy can we really expect?  Is 80% accuracy enough to alleviate one's fear of accepting "tainted" coins?  What individual or business would be okay with having 20% of their income blocked by their bank?

And what's the criteria for determining what's tainted and what isn't?  In the USA alone we have states have legalized the recreational use of marijuana, but many states continue to ban the recreational use of marijuana.  If I were to legally sell weed in one state in exchange for bitcoin, can I spend that bitcoin in another state where marijuana is banned?  Would chain analysis flag my UTXOs based on the location of my intended "send to" address?  How would they know?   What if I accepted cash instead, would the same restrictions apply?

What if it's all arbitrary, anyway and one exchange clears the coins, yet another decides to blacklist them?

It sounds very much like you are saying "Well, just make sure you have nothing to hide, and then you'll have nothing to worry about."

I'm of the opinion that if you're using bitcoin, you have something to hide.  Even if that may not true right now, just wait 15 minutes.