ㅤ

[BlackHatCoiner]

You don't have to setup an entire company, you just have to find other peers who want to coinjoin with you.

Which is practically not an option, and even if it is, you gain much less privacy in comparison with JoinMarket, wherein there are thousands of BTC in liquidity.

And still, you can't expect from a regular user who wants to have their coins coinjoined to find peers. Like, what's more useful, to simply be a taker or a maker in JoinMarket and have it mixed in a couple of hours max, or reach o_e_l_e_o, n0nce, witcher_sense, 20kevin20 etc., and have them do a coinjoin with me?

The point of owning the private coin is so you can verify the coordinator is not performing a Sybil attack on your non private coin, there's no trust at all.

Are you daft or something? So, SBF can setup a coordinator and do coinjoin with one of their peers, and they'll be considered private? Are these totally acceptable to the default coordinator now? A few pages before you'd have them denied. Won't the third party (who's by the way a chain analysis company) trivially notice it's SBF's coins?

[1714290950]

1714290950

[1714290950]

1714290950

[1714290950]

1714290950

[1714290950]

1714290950

[20kevin20]

How does Whirlwind Money collect their customer’s information?

By linking the depositor's address with their withdrawal destination.  Coinjoin coordinators are not trusted with their customer's data and are not trusted with depositor funds, so it's clear that Whirlwind is acting maliciously by choosing to act as a trusted third party instead.

And Wasabi is working with a company which extensively, aggressively, profoundly checks who my address belongs to. I’ve used Wasabi CoinJoins before and on the long run made little mistakes that practically invalidated my previous privacy that I obtained through CoinJoins. Have 20 UTXOs in a single CoinJoin round. If even 50% of the owners fail to preserve their privacy post CoinJoin,, Coinfirm has a 10% chance of finding who the others were.

What’s your point?

Except you absolutely can't. If your coin is rejected, even if you think it is private you have no idea if you are being Sybil attacked or if Coinfirm have deemed your coins too naughty..

You would know there is no reason you could be rejected because the coin is private.

So if I set up another coordinator and somehow get my privacy going with a few rounds of CoinJoins organized with a few hundred other participants, Coinfirm doesn’t block the resulted private coins?

Is that because it’s very likely to mess up my privacy on the way or is it because Coinfirm represents just a gate of access to CoinJoins? If former, this sounds malicious. If latter, then what’s the point of Coinfirm’s partnership with you? I set up a coordinator with 99 criminals and we’re doing a few dozen CoinJoins. Now we’re allowed to use Wasabi for having private coins? Why the partnership then

[arabspaceship123]

@Kruw Wasabi wallet data privacy questions

Wasabi wallet's losing rep after it's a hired blockchain analysis company. Which info does zkSNACKs collect from customers in Wasabi wallet? I'd like to sort misinformations from facts.

[Kruw]

@Kruw Wasabi wallet data privacy questions

Wasabi wallet's losing rep after it's a hired blockchain analysis company. Which info does zkSNACKs collect from customers in Wasabi wallet? I'd like to sort misinformations from facts.

Fact:  zkSNACKs collects no information from users of Wasabi Wallet.  Read more here:  https://blog.wasabiwallet.io/zksnacks-means-zero-knowledge/

[Flexystar]

I think i visited the wasabi wallet review in the services section earlier when it was launched on the forum and it had enormous positive response from every users who tested it including the legends here. As far as I understand that was review given about the Wallet UI/UX, how it operates, Conjoin strategy behind the privacy and much more. Some of the reviews were highly technical and beyond my understanding. So far I liked it and even wanted to switch the wallet to wasabi from shit wallet like Mycelium (No hard feelings)

However, after visiting this thread for latest reviews and support about the Wasabi wallet, it seems we have taken little wrong turn here? I am interested to understand what is the current topic about leaked data and stuff? Is it true or it's just negative marketing about the wallet.

Though I am very much convinced that wallet has proven itself time to time and since most of the legend members has it in the trust list rest is just negative marketing?

[o_e_l_e_o]

Though I am very much convinced that wallet has proven itself time to time and since most of the legend members has it in the trust list rest is just negative marketing?

I previously used Wasabi. I previously recommended Wasabi. I previously vouched for Wasabi.

Then Wasabi completely sold out everything they once stood for by funding and cooperating with blockchain analysis in order to protect their own profits at the expense of all their users. They are now pro-surveillance, pro-censorship, anti-fungibility, and anti-privacy. They are actively supporting the enemies of bitcoin and directly undermining everything bitcoin stands for.

No one should ever use Wasabi again. There are far better wallets and far better coinjoin implementations you can use instead.

[Kruw]

I am interested to understand what is the current topic about leaked data and stuff? Is it true or it's just negative marketing about the wallet.

There is no data leaked by Wasabi Wallet, the topic is over coinjoin coordinators using data on the blockchain to deny coinjoin services to users whose coins trace to criminal activity.

[arabspaceship123]

Tech users aren't happy they don't agree with data collected by Coinfirm. They don't know what happens to it.

I've new example Kruw. It's about where info's being passed. zkSNACKs own Wasabi wallet so they know my 0.1 btc balance's analysed from blockchain to a crime. They don't want to be accessory to criminals. You've said zkSNACKs doesn't leak data doesn't know any thing about it's users so what's zkSNACKs going to do when Coinfirm reject a mix?

tx1 Satoshi Electrum wallet received 0.5 btc in good faith for goods shipment
tx2 Satoshi uses Electrum wallet sends 0.1 btc to arabspaceship123 Electrum wallet for goods shipment
tx3 arabspaceship123 Electrum wallet sends 0.1 btc to Wasabi wallet for mix
tx4 Wasabi wallet use Coinfirm for analysis. My 0.1 btc from Atomic Wallet hack so coinjoin denied
tx5 Wasabi wallet has balance 0.1 btc linked to criminal act

I am interested to understand what is the current topic about leaked data and stuff? Is it true or it's just negative marketing about the wallet.

There is no data leaked by Wasabi Wallet, the topic is over coinjoin coordinators using data on the blockchain to deny coinjoin services to users whose coins trace to criminal activity.

[BlackHatCoiner]

Which info does zkSNACKs collect from customers in Wasabi wallet? I'd like to sort misinformations from facts.

None, but that isn't the point. The point is that funding surveillance firm to spy their users is malicious, especially when portraying yourself as the ultimate privacy and fungibility solution. It's pure hypocrisy.

You've said zkSNACKs doesn't leak data doesn't know any thing about it's users so what's zkSNACKs going to do when Coinfirm reject a mix?

They're probably going to be okay with it, and approve the rejection (if there's approval part from the coinjoin server, we don't know for sure*). According to this policy, though, don't expect to question them for anything: https://raw.githubusercontent.com/zkSNACKs/WalletWasabi/master/WalletWasabi/Legal/Assets/LegalDocumentsWw2.txt (Coin filtering part)

* From what I saw in the unit tests, the coordinator software makes a request to the chain analysis firm, and rejects anything without approving it.

[arabspaceship123]

What's zkSNACKs going to do if they know a user's got stolen cryptocurrency. It's non custodial so they can't take suspected coins but if they know where stolen Bitcoin's located they've got to be obligated. Are there circumstances after analysis zkSNACKs or Coinfirm must notify police if coinjoin's been denied.

They're probably going to be okay with it, and approve the rejection (if there's approval part from the coinjoin server, we don't know for sure*). According to this policy, though, don't expect to question them for anything: https://raw.githubusercontent.com/zkSNACKs/WalletWasabi/master/WalletWasabi/Legal/Assets/LegalDocumentsWw2.txt (Coin filtering part)

* From what I saw in the unit tests, the coordinator software makes a request to the chain analysis firm, and rejects anything without approving it.

[Pmalek]

What's zkSNACKs going to do if they know a user's got stolen cryptocurrency.

I don't think they are going to do anything. Blockchain analysis is mostly a guessing game and trying to connect the dots based on certain criteria no one knows anything about. It's nowhere close to being considered as the absolute truth or any truth at all.

You being n possession of an UTXO that originates from criminal activity doesn't mean you were involved in said activities. There are many ways you could have come in possession of that particular UTXO. It's the same as with paper bills in your wallet. Traces of cocaine on it doesn't make you a drug lord or a drug addict. Money moves from person to person and so does bitcoin. These blockchain analysis companies have created a bullshit business model of selling their interpretation of events and the truth to those willing to purchase it, be that governments or Wasabi and its coordinator.   

[arabspaceship123]

If it's interpretation based models blockchain analysis companies make income on hypothesis. So zkSNACKs isn't going to be the last one to try.

Kruw didn't reply with his direct answer so I've removed Wasabi wallet from my Win 11. I won't use it for testing or reviews.

What's zkSNACKs going to do if they know a user's got stolen cryptocurrency.

These blockchain analysis companies have created a bullshit business model of selling their interpretation of events and the truth to those willing to purchase it, be that governments or Wasabi and its coordinator.   

[Pmalek]

Kruw didn't reply with his direct answer so I've removed Wasabi wallet from my Win 11. I won't use it for testing or reviews.

You don't need to worry about the security of your funds if you are using Wasabi. It's important to make the distinction between security and privacy. No one is saying that Wasabi is an unsafe wallet, or that your coins can go missing by using it. If the analysis is negative, you won't be allowed to use those UTXOs for the coinjoin, and that's it. Wasabi or zkSNACKs won't take possession of those "problematic" UTXOs in similar fashion as centralized services do.

[Wind_FURY]

Have Wasabi Wallet developers ever revealed which blockchain analysis companies they have worked with, or is currently working with? I found something disturbing about Chainalysis when I was DYOR about "United States v. Roman Sterlingov" and Bitcoin Fog.

The report is actually educational, telling a brief history about CoinJoins and Bitcoin Mixers. BUT, quoted below is the concerning part.

Chainalysis ‘fixes’ information and timeline for IRS: The discovery produced by the Government contains a spreadsheet authored by IRS-CI Devon Beckett, last updated on August 8, 2016. In it, he appears to refer to Chainalysis manipulating the data in this case because it did not fit in to the Government’s preconceived notions. The spreadsheet states:

If BCF is truly not up an [sic] until this date, then timeline appears to fit well excluding the custom onion generation. Chainalysis seems to think there [sic] transactions before this date and should be releasing a "fix" which provide more accurate display of information/timeline

I understand this to mean that the traces were not aligning in an advantageous way, so Chainalysis offered to adjust their algorithm or data manually to create a more favorable trace for the IRS.

https://storage.courtlistener.com/recap/gov.uscourts.dcd.232431/gov.uscourts.dcd.232431.159.1.pdf

[arabspaceship123]

Kruw didn't reply with his direct answer so I've removed Wasabi wallet from my Win 11. I won't use it for testing or reviews.

You don't need to worry about the security of your funds if you are using Wasabi. It's important to make the distinction between security and privacy. No one is saying that Wasabi is an unsafe wallet, or that your coins can go missing by using it.

Thanks Pmalek I get what you're saying. I know any funds on Wasabi wallet won't go missing. I used it for testing. I don't have funds in cryptocurrencies it's mostly sats from my sig campaign. I wanted to test Wasabi Wallet for review but I won't do it.

If the analysis is negative, you won't be allowed to use those UTXOs for the coinjoin, and that's it. Wasabi or zkSNACKs won't take possession of those "problematic" UTXOs in similar fashion as centralized services do.

That's what I'm saying. If coinjoin's rejected Coinfirm knows you're holding rejected coins. If they're rejected because linked to hacks like Atomic Wallet or Binance that'll mean Coinfirm logged data about you. I'm saying it can't be private if they're collecting data to use another day for trying to follow you or the funds. I don't want to protect criminals I'm not interested in crime so it's about what zkSNACKs say they're doing when they're doing the opposite.

[Pmalek]

Have Wasabi Wallet developers ever revealed which blockchain analysis companies they have worked with, or is currently working with?

No, I don't think they have. They aren't very talkative about issues that doesn't make them look good. o_e_l_e_o posted a link to this GitHub code some time ago. If you do a CTRL + F search on "Coinfirm", you will find several lines of code mentioning that service. 

[Medusah]

It's pretty obvious Coinfirm, as these lines come from unit tests of the backend that is running by zkSNACKs.  But, for some reason, absolute silence when it comes to that.

[NotATether]

Have Wasabi Wallet developers ever revealed which blockchain analysis companies they have worked with, or is currently working with? I found something disturbing about Chainalysis when I was DYOR about "United States v. Roman Sterlingov" and Bitcoin Fog.

The report is actually educational, telling a brief history about CoinJoins and Bitcoin Mixers. BUT, quoted below is the concerning part.

Chainalysis ‘fixes’ information and timeline for IRS: The discovery produced by the Government contains a spreadsheet authored by IRS-CI Devon Beckett, last updated on August 8, 2016. In it, he appears to refer to Chainalysis manipulating the data in this case because it did not fit in to the Government’s preconceived notions. The spreadsheet states:

If BCF is truly not up an [sic] until this date, then timeline appears to fit well excluding the custom onion generation. Chainalysis seems to think there [sic] transactions before this date and should be releasing a "fix" which provide more accurate display of information/timeline

I understand this to mean that the traces were not aligning in an advantageous way, so Chainalysis offered to adjust their algorithm or data manually to create a more favorable trace for the IRS.

https://storage.courtlistener.com/recap/gov.uscourts.dcd.232431/gov.uscourts.dcd.232431.159.1.pdf

If this is true then that just means that Chainalysis is more useful for manipulating court trials and less useful for tracing dirty money (you know, the whole reason they were incorporated for in the first place).

Coinfirm is headquartered in London so I can't imagine them selling out to the IRS, for national security reasons, although it definitely spells bad news if you happen to be at a trial in England.

[Flexystar]

Though I am very much convinced that wallet has proven itself time to time and since most of the legend members has it in the trust list rest is just negative marketing?

I previously used Wasabi. I previously recommended Wasabi. I previously vouched for Wasabi.

Then Wasabi completely sold out everything they once stood for by funding and cooperating with blockchain analysis in order to protect their own profits at the expense of all their users. They are now pro-surveillance, pro-censorship, anti-fungibility, and anti-privacy. They are actively supporting the enemies of bitcoin and directly undermining everything bitcoin stands for.

No one should ever use Wasabi again. There are far better wallets and far better coinjoin implementations you can use instead.

I am now more confused considering what other users are stating and what few of them stating. The fellow members suggest it’s just about the coinjoin usage that is being used by the criminals and thus wasabi is getting targeted in the process. I am sure this does sound little fishy because if authorities had any problems then they would have targeted other big mixers in existence however they are not because it simply straight business. If you have your books clean you get to keep the business up and running, if not then you become victim card that everyone plays around.

I am interested to understand what is the current topic about leaked data and stuff? Is it true or it's just negative marketing about the wallet.

There is no data leaked by Wasabi Wallet, the topic is over coinjoin coordinators using data on the blockchain to deny coinjoin services to users whose coins trace to criminal activity.

That’s what repeating itself without any solid proof. If you checkout the responses from other users regarding their counter questions about the tech usage then there are no official talks or replies on the same. That makes us think either they are busy in sorting what went wrong or they are simply wrong.

[Kruw]

I am sure this does sound little fishy because if authorities had any problems then they would have targeted other big mixers in existence however they are not because it simply straight business.

The government targeted Chipmixer, seizing user funds and data:

https://www.justice.gov/opa/pr/justice-department-investigation-leads-takedown-darknet-cryptocurrency-mixer-processed-over-3

The government targeted Alphabay, seizing user funds and data:

https://www.justice.gov/opa/pr/alphabay-largest-online-dark-market-shut-down

The government targeted Bestmixer, seizing user funds and data:

https://www.europol.europa.eu/media-press/newsroom/news/multi-million-euro-cryptocurrency-laundering-service-bestmixerio-taken-down

This is why there's simply no point in responding to any of the "critics" in this thread that advertise mixing services in their signatures: They are not critical of Wasabi because they think it is bad or doesn't work, they are critical of Wasabi because their goal is to scam people out of their Bitcoins.  Since coinjoins are non custodial and Wasabi never reveals any data to any third parties, these scammers will tell any lie necessary about Wasabi in order to get people to give up control of their Bitcoin and make their data vulnerable to government seizure by using their "mixing service" instead.

Kruw didn't reply with his direct answer so I've removed Wasabi wallet from my Win 11. I won't use it for testing or reviews.

What's zkSNACKs going to do if they know a user's got stolen cryptocurrency.

I've already told you before zkSNACKs does not collect any data on their users.  No one at zkSNACKs can give any user information or any user funds to a government agent even if you put a gun to their head.  That's the entire point:  Total privacy, no trusted third parties.