Which mixer are you using? Can you assess it with Tor?

[_act_]

I saw this online, can centralized mixer be only accessed by IP address? That is confusing because I think Tor can also be used. I have used Tor for many sites before which do not work and I have not mixed before. But I have not used Tor for anything about bitcoin before which I will not be able to access, but I have only enabled Tor for this forum before and for access my bitcoin wallet.

https://cointelegraph.com/news/crypto-mixers-relevance-wanes-as-regulators-take-aim

“Centralized services are obviously more accessible and more approachable. However, they will have access to your Bitcoin and IP addresses. Hence, they are not the most private service in the world. Decentralized mixers can be a little less approachable, but they are a lot more private.”

Which centralized mixer are you using? Can you enable Tor to access the mixer? Which one is better, the decentralized mixing machanism mixers that coinjoin like wasabi wallet which now only accept coins that have not be involved in illicit activities or centralized mixers which people with illicit activities will prefer not to use because it is centralized.

[n0nce]

As you can tell in this forum many reputable members advertise for ChipMixer. It is a long standing service that works great over Tor and that's my recommended way of using it. The easiest way would be to quickly download Tor Browser and open the URL that you find directly on the bottom of the official ChipMixer website in the Tor browser.


One thing to make sure: do not Google or web-search ChipMixer, since lots of fake websites will pop up (Tor based and clearnet based) which look the same and will just steal your funds.

Just go to [chipmixer dot com] and copy the Tor URL from there. You could also take it from someone's signature who you trust or from ChipMixer's forum thread here: https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=1935098.0

[o_e_l_e_o]

If you are serious about privacy, then doing anything without Tor is a non-starter. Accessing mixers, using non-full-node wallets, looking up transactions on block explorers, whatever it is you do, every website, service, or software you use will be able to link your IP address to whichever addresses or transactions you are interacting with.

Which one is better, the decentralized mixing machanism mixers that coinjoin like wasabi wallet which now only accept coins that have not be involved in illicit activities or centralized mixers which people with illicit activities will prefer not to use because it is centralized.

Note that it is Wasabi wallet which is now censoring its users, not coinjoin as a concept. You can still use other coinjoin implementations freely.

Also note that cointelegraph is clickbait trash and you shouldn't listen to a word they say. Their claim in that article that mixed coins are associated with something illegal in the majority of cases is provably false, as we known only 8% of mixed coins are linked to illicit activity. Saying that a privacy service is no longer relevant because of increasing government oversight is frankly nonsense - if anything, privacy services have never been more relevant. And claiming that most mixer addresses "are easily traceable" is also nonsense. Show me a single case of a ChipMixer mix being de-anonymized.

[BlackHatCoiner]

“Centralized services are obviously more accessible and more approachable. However, they will have access to your Bitcoin and IP addresses. Hence, they are not the most private service in the world. Decentralized mixers can be a little less approachable, but they are a lot more private.”

This is not true. First of all, it's not the reason they own your money that diminishes your privacy. It's the fact that the know which are the outputs you own. If by decentralized mixers we mean coinjoin, there's still a party that knows what you own.

Secondly, decentralized mixers aren't more private, that's the problem. If only they were. There's no case, I know, of a person who got traced after they mixed in ChipMixer, which is the most trustworthy and well-known. On the other hand, you can find lots of cases where a coinjoin was just not enough.

[_act_]

Also note that cointelegraph is clickbait trash and you shouldn't listen to a word they say. Their claim in that article that mixed coins are associated with something illegal in the majority of cases is provably false, as we known only 8% of mixed coins are linked to illicit activity. Saying that a privacy service is no longer relevant because of increasing government oversight is frankly nonsense - if anything, privacy services have never been more relevant. And claiming that most mixer addresses "are easily traceable" is also nonsense. Show me a single case of a ChipMixer mix being de-anonymized.

Cointelegraph and other news sites are full of trash, I checked the 2022 Chainanalysis report that I created topic about on this forum, DeFi habours scam, mixers do not take more than 8%.

https://blog.chainalysis.com/reports/2022-crypto-crime-report-preview-cryptocurrency-money-laundering/

If you are serious about privacy, then doing anything without Tor is a non-starter. Accessing mixers, using non-full-node wallets, looking up transactions on block explorers, whatever it is you do, every website, service, or software you use will be able to link your IP address to whichever addresses or transactions you are interacting with.

What others decentralized mixers can be used to coinjoin? What mechanism are coinjoin using? Like on Wasabi, it is a wallet, is it not connected to a central server that can detect the addresses the bitcoins are sent to, I think there can be some coinjoin mixers that work like that which is also centralized but people will think they are decentralized but not.

If by decentralized mixers we mean coinjoin, there's still a party that knows what you own.

Which means they are still using a central server which can know all about the mixed coin?

[n0nce]

Their claim in that article that mixed coins are associated with something illegal in the majority of cases is provably false, as we known only 8% of mixed coins are linked to illicit activity.

I don't even think you can really put up any number like that, since what is considered 'illicit activity' varies so much from one legislation to the next. Like, me sending some BTC to a friend so he prints a 'stop the war' sign could be considered illicit activity if the friend lives in Russia, but wouldn't if he lived in America.

Similarly, a purchase of Marijuana through BTC would be illicit activity in Spain, but not illicit in the Netherlands or some American states now.

Since Bitcoin knows no nations, no borders, no legislations, there is no definition of what is illicit or not when using Bitcoin.

Secondly, decentralized mixers aren't more private, that's the problem. If only they were. There's no case, I know, of a person who got traced after they mixed in ChipMixer, which is the most trustworthy and well-known. On the other hand, you can find lots of cases where a coinjoin was just not enough.

Yes, from my understanding, the rule of thumb is that the centralized, custodial service ChipMixer provides, would theoretically allow them to exit-scam (lower security), for the benefit of higher privacy. Whereas CoinJoin should be more secure (not entrusting your coins to someone), but with a tradeoff in privacy.

What mechanism are coinjoin using?

CoinJoin on Bitcoin Wiki

Like on Wasabi, it is a wallet, is it not connected to a central server that can detect the addresses the bitcoins are sent to

Wasabi uses a centralized coordinator server for CoinJoin that can and does collect a lot of information and in fact, even uses it to censor transactions.

[o_e_l_e_o]

What others decentralized mixers can be used to coinjoin? What mechanism are coinjoin using?

JoinMarket is the implementation I would suggest using now that Wasabi is censoring people. You'll need to run your own node first though:
https://en.bitcoin.it/wiki/JoinMarket
https://github.com/JoinMarket-Org/joinmarket-clientserver

I don't even think you can really put up any number like that, since what is considered 'illicit activity' varies so much from one legislation to the next.

The 8% figure is taken from a report from Chainalysis. Unfortunately the original has been taken down, but you can still see news reports on it from various places such as: https://bitcoinmagazine.com/culture/chainalysis-most-mixed-bitcoin-not-used-for-illicit-purposes
The majority of coins being mixed are coming directly from exchanges, simply from people looking to reclaim some of their privacy from the crazy surveillance they are being subjected to. And if you look further down, the majority of coins used on darknet markets also come from exchanges, with a tiny percentage coming from mixers.

I don't disagree that you cannot easily label things "legal" and "illegal", but there are some things which are clearly illegal everywhere, such as theft of coins which are not yours. Even then, that is minority of mixer traffic. Any claim that says "the majority of mixed coins are illegal" or something along those lines is provably and demonstrably false, and the person making such a claim almost certainly has an ulterior motive.

[dkbit98]

Which centralized mixer are you using? Can you enable Tor to access the mixer?

You can use Chipmixer with Tor browser without any issues, just make sure you use official website and don't search it on internet yourself because there are a lot of scam fake onion websites.
I am not sure if any other mixing websites are working Tor, and I wouldn't experiment when you have something that was tested and proven to work.
Do your own research and know the risks before using any website for mixing.

Which one is better, the decentralized mixing machanism mixers that coinjoin like wasabi wallet which now only accept coins that have not be involved in illicit activities or centralized mixers which people with illicit activities will prefer not to use because it is centralized.

Wasabi wallet is inferior for privacy compared to Chipmixer, and especially after recent decision from them to blacklist certain transactions.
There is nothing wrong in using open source software, but apparently regulators thinks differently and developers are under heavy pressure if they are publicly known.
I am sure we are going to see more wallets that use different approach for achieving better privacy for Bitcoin transactions.