Coinjoin on Trezor Suite

[Don Pedro Dinero]

OK, so if we want to buy a HW, what's left?

Passport is currently the best on the market in my opinion.

I haven't had any problems moving them so far.

Have you tried coinjoining them?

No. But apart from the Wasabi problem I had also heard of some CEX blacklisting coins from mixers and things like that, although obviously I haven't transferred my coins to CEX either.

[1714982876]

1714982876

[1714982876]

1714982876

[1714982876]

1714982876

[1714982876]

1714982876

[o_e_l_e_o]

If a centralized service such a CEX is discriminating against your coins for any reason, least of all simply because you used a mixer or a coinjoin in order to protect your privacy, then I would suggest never using that CEX. I would actually suggest never using any CEX, and instead buy and sell your bitcoin peer to peer using a high quality DEX: https://kycnot.me/

If Wasabi have censored your coins because they violate one of their secret criteria, there is a good chance that any centralized exchange will take similar issue with the same coins. But of course there are plenty of other privacy tools out there which don't spy on their users and enforce blacklists which you can use to bypass any such "taint" nonsense.

[RickDeckard]

If a centralized service such a CEX is discriminating against your coins for any reason, least of all simply because you used a mixer or a coinjoin in order to protect your privacy, then I would suggest never using that CEX. I would actually suggest never using any CEX, and instead buy and sell your bitcoin peer to peer using a high quality DEX: https://kycnot.me/

If Wasabi have censored your coins because they violate one of their secret criteria, there is a good chance that any centralized exchange will take similar issue with the same coins. But of course there are plenty of other privacy tools out there which don't spy on their users and enforce blacklists which you can use to bypass any such "taint" nonsense.

As Wasaibi Legal Terms puts it, their secret criteria is "(...) essential to zkSNACKs Ltd.'s risk management and security protocols." and thereby "(...)that zkSNACKs Ltd. is under no obligation to disclose the details of its risk management and security procedures to you."[1]. I wonder what was going on on the head of the person who wrote this Terms - didn't he/she thought that this a tremendous attack on an individual sovereignty? Factions aside - as this Terms were written by the company - I don't know how anyone is able to read the pure definition on how the system blocks UTXO's and not feel like this is against the very notion of privacy, in any degree. It is even more shocking knowing that Trezor, as a company, fully aware of how the coordinator works, still decides to associate themselves (and their users) with such shady practices...
[1]https://raw.githubusercontent.com/zkSNACKs/WalletWasabi/master/WalletWasabi/Legal/Assets/LegalDocumentsWw2.txt

[o_e_l_e_o]

I wonder what was going on on the head of the person who wrote this Terms

Probably something along the lines of "I don't care about morals, as long as I get paid."

I don't know how anyone is able to read the pure definition on how the system blocks UTXO's and not feel like this is against the very notion of privacy, in any degree.

You know it is anti-privacy, I know it is anti-privacy, anyone who can read knows it is anti-privacy. The Wasabi guys are also fully aware it is anti-privacy, but they have decided that sacrificing their morals, selling out their users, implementing censorship, handing your UTXOs directly to blockchain analysis companies, and generally being anti-bitcoin is an acceptable price to pay as long as they get to keep make profits for themselves.

It is even more shocking knowing that Trezor, as a company, fully aware of how the coordinator works, still decides to associate themselves (and their users) with such shady practices...

This tweet pretty much sums it up: https://nitter.it/dammkewl/status/1648575580927930371

[RickDeckard]

This tweet pretty much sums it up: https://nitter.it/dammkewl/status/1648575580927930371

It is no wonder that privacy focus solutions are hammering down on Trezor for this. It's also shocking to see that no official communication has been issued by Trezor, other than the reply from one of their team members on their forums previously linked here. I know for a fact that they won't drop the coordinator since the damage is done, but at least they are fully aware that their users/clients are aware of these recent actions and for sure will voice their opinion whenever they can.
[1]https://nitter.it/Trezor/status/1648563308859932672

[DaveF]

I wonder what was going on on the head of the person who wrote this Terms

Probably something along the lines of "I don't care about morals, as long as I get paid."

It always comes down to that.
Makes you wonder who came to who. Did Wasabi go to Trezor to help stem the flow of users from their service due to the spying. Or did Trezor go looking for a Coinjoin partner and Wasabi could do it.

Either way, I am 100% sure it all comes down to the almighty dollar, or whatever your local currency is.

And on top of that, since Trezor does not use a secure element in their wallets, nobody should have been using them anyway.

-Dave

[dkbit98]

Given their support for AOPP last year, embedding KYC requiring exchanges in to their software, and now funding mass surveillance and censorship, Trezor really have taken a major turn for the worse.

Let's be fair, they removed AOPP after community reaction, and I still didn't hear a single case of people complaining for mass censorship because of Coinjoin someone used, you painted unrealistic dark picture.
Now I can also criticize Trezor in more realistic way, for example they introduced Tor support for Trezor Suite while ago, but it was really bad implementation that leaked real addresses  
This would continue to happen if some good community member didn't report this issue on their github page.

Real rookie mistake, Trezor Desktop App with Tor Leaks DNS Queries:
https://github.com/trezor/trezor-suite/issues/8185

Trezor Desktop App with Tor Leaks DNS Queries
https://www.reddit.com/r/TREZOR/comments/12ut21x/trezor_desktop_app_with_tor_leaks_dns_queries/

Trezor's Tor features are either fishy or poorly implemented.
https://www.reddit.com/r/TREZOR/comments/12u0fbd/trezors_tor_features_are_either_fishy_or_poorly/

And on top of that, since Trezor does not use a secure element in their wallets, nobody should have been using them anyway.

Secure element is not a holly grail  
It's better to be fair open source device without secure element, than to be closed source black box with NDA secure element.
And btw Trezor is in final stages of releasing their own secure element.

[o_e_l_e_o]

Let's be fair, they removed AOPP after community reaction

Exactly. They only removed it when it became clear it might hurt their profits. They should never have considered implementing it in the first place, for the moral reasons of not helping centralized exchanges spy on their users.

and I still didn't hear a single case of people complaining for mass censorship because of Coinjoin someone used, you painted unrealistic dark picture.

No one is going to come forward and say "Here is my UTXO which was censored". And even if they didn't censor a single UTXO, the fees they collect are still being used to directly fund blockchain analysis, which damages privacy for every single bitcoin user, advances the nonsense concept of taint, and works against fungibility.

And btw Trezor is in final stages of releasing their own secure element.

Doesn't matter to me in the slightest anymore. I don't care if Trezor release the greatest hardware wallet the world has ever seen (or you know, even fix the critical seed extraction vulnerability ). I will never purchase another Trezor device as long as they fund blockchain analysis.

[dkbit98]

Exactly. They only removed it when it became clear it might hurt their profits. They should never have considered implementing it in the first place, for the moral reasons of not helping centralized exchanges spy on their users.

Dude c'mon they are business, not a charity, unless you want to go full communism hardware wallet.

Doesn't matter to me in the slightest anymore. I don't care if Trezor release the greatest hardware wallet the world has ever seen (or you know, even fix the critical seed extraction vulnerability ). I will never purchase another Trezor device as long as they fund blockchain analysis.

I don't care what you do with your money at all, and you don't have to send your buying reports to me in public  
Meanwhile you are going to continue trusting other centralized mixing services, even after it was proven that they deceived users about deleted data.
That looks like double standards to me.

[RickDeckard]

Dude c'mon they are business, not a charity, unless you want to go full communism hardware wallet.

I totally agree with you dkbit98 - A business has to survive in the harsh environment that is created whenever competitors arise. What I can't defend is that they are not honoring their mission, hence why this picture sums it up rather well[1]. Just look at one of their pillars that support their mission values[2]:

Protecting your rights
Exercise the freedom to buy, sell, trade, and pay with absolute confidence using Trezor hardware wallets and the Trezor Suite app.
(...)
Creating a secure ecosystem
Manage, store, and use your crypto within the inclusive Trezor environment for complete financial privacy and security.

How can a company state these honorable pillars, while at the same time making shady decisions such as partnering with zkSNACKs? Once again, I'm all for developing/evolving your business and adapting to the environment where you are, but from my perspective one has to always stay true to their roots - after all, if they go against them, what will they stand for?
[1]https://nitter.it/dammkewl/status/1648575580927930371
[2]https://trezor.io/company

[o_e_l_e_o]

Dude c'mon they are business, not a charity

They are a business which should be focused on self custody and security, and therefore not support protocols or ideas which compromise their users' privacy or aid blockchain analysis companies. We have both agreed in the past how ridiculous it was for Ledger to integrate a KYC credit card - this is the exact same principle.

That looks like double standards to me.

We know that some VPNs harvest data - that doesn't make all VPNs useless.

Once again, I'm all for developing/evolving your business and adapting to the environment where you are, but from my perspective one has to always stay true to their roots - after all, if they go against them, what will they stand for?

Worth remembering that there is no legislation forcing Wasabi to implement blacklists - they are doing it voluntarily. And if you want some real hypocrisy, go and check out some of the documentation on their website. For example:

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.

Yes, imagine checking blacklists and making bitcoin less valuable as money!

[DaveF]

And on top of that, since Trezor does not use a secure element in their wallets, nobody should have been using them anyway.

Secure element is not a holly grail  
It's better to be fair open source device without secure element, than to be closed source black box with NDA secure element.
And btw Trezor is in final stages of releasing their own secure element.

Fair point, but and this is kind of a religious argument in terms of this vs. that, but FOR ME a black box NDA secured element is better then no element.
You and others may feel differently.

Tropic Square has been coming soon for a while now, and yes I know there was a pandemic going on but it's been a 'we will use this one when it's ready until then no SE' and everyone keeps waiting.

And looking at the way they do everything else in terms of security and privacy (this coinjoin, AOPP, the tor stuff you listed) do you really trust them to do a SE properly?

-Dave

[philipma1957]

I dug this up due to mixer bans coming.

I have used trezor one for a long time.

I never did coinjoin.

So

a) can I talk about trezor and coin join
b) I have no need for my coins to be private
c) I never used a mixer
d) I used btc like cash never did long hodls
e) I mined and spent most profits

I now own:

 Trezor One
 Trezor Two
 Trezor Three is on the way

If I never use coinjoin am I compliant with USA rules of mixing wrongly
If I never use a mixer am I compliant with USA rule of mixing  wrongly

I do advertise a mixer as I know some people may have a need for private coins.
OG whales do not want to show they have 20 or 30 or 300 or 3000 coins even if they are fully tax compliant.

Seems like trezor may now be the way to keep privacy