[CLS][banned mixer] Mixer Review#2| 6mBTC+50% OFF | Bonus 10mBTC & 10% OFF for ALL!

[mikeywith]

[banned mixer] Mixer Review Program #2
Bitcointalk username: Mikeywith


I started with using the Clearnet version on Chrome, unfortunately, regardless of testing different browsers (Brave, Tor, and even Edge) I kept getting this error on the Captcha step.

Code:

An error has occurred. Please refresh the page and try again.

I wanted to contact their support but it also had a similar issue saying

Leave us a message
An error has occurred. Please refresh the page and try again.

At this point, if I was just a regular user I would have moved on to another mixer, but I contacted their support on the Bitcointalk forum and moved on to testing the Tor Mirror


Mix #1 :

Browser: Tor

Code:

Standard:
2 receiving addresses
78.99% (8 hrs.2min) and 21.01% (10hrs.19min)
service fee : 1.88%

Process:

1- Enter receveing address/es



Positive Notes:

- The mixer checks for the validity of the address as you type, all mixers I used have the validity check but some of them do that at the back end and thus you will have to submit the page first.

- The option of choosing delay in both hours and minutes is an advantage over some of the other mixers which only have the delay in hours.


2- Confirming the deposit address:



Negative Notes:

- The (Please, download the letter of guarantee before a transfer) is hardly noticeable, it must be more visible than the deposit information.

3- Sending the deposit.



Positive Notes:

- The process was showing in real-time, I broadcasted the transaction and it showed in the mixer right away, and it took only a few seconds to reflect the first confirmation on the blockchain.
 
Negative Notes:

- The tumbler code is somewhere at the bottom of this page, very easy to miss if you don't scroll down and honestly I almost forgot about it since my attention was on the deposit process, the page has a ton of blank space at the top, alongside the logo and steps icons at the top, all of which are taking a lot of "wasted" space

-I think this page should be squeezed to fit a single screen without having to scroll down, where everything needed (Letter of Guarantee + Deposit status + tumbler code appears in the same height level without needing to scroll)

- No easy way of entering the order number should one close the page by mistake, if someone doesn't pay enough attention to the URL which contains the order number /order#JTPFXE5B-ABCDE then it will be hard for them to go back to the same order without contacting the support team.

4- Receiving the transaction:



Positive Notes:

-My deposit was broadcasted at 4:29 PM, and the received transaction was sent at 12:44 AM, a total of 13 minutes delay which is perfectly fine given the nature of the blockchain.

- I received the first transaction which had 18 sat/Vbyte when the current mempool estimator showed 13, so the mixer's estimator is rather good, I have used other services with far less accurate fee estimation where they either pay too low or too high a fee.

Negative Notes:

-Despite receiving the transaction the timer is still running on the order page as if it's still yet to come.



* Notice at this point the transaction is confirmed on the blockchain, yet the timer is lagging.


Mix #2 :


Browser: FireFox

Unfortunately, up to this point (nearly 9 hours) and despite contacting the support both on Bitcointlalk as well as their website, the clearnet is still not functioning, so I had to use tor mirror on Firefox as well.

Code:

Premium:
1 receiving address
100% (19 min) 
service fee: 5%

Positive Notes:

-I used the tumbler code for the second mix so that I don't get my previously sent coins which worked (of course, it could have failed if the timing was better so I had to do another test Mix #3)

Negative Notes:

-The warning that says after the deposit is made:

If one of the outputs has a round value (like exactly 0.1 BTC) — this output can be considered as the recipient. Instead of sending 0.1 BTC, send for example 0.100124.

Is pretty useless at this point, it should show on the first page, and then again on the top of the deposit page not at the bottom, now since you can't control what the user sends, you could at least control what you send by slightly modifying your 0.0002 BTC fee to make it in a dynamic range of say 0.000015 - 0.0002

Looking at this transaction which I received from the mixer

https://blockchair.com/bitcoin/transaction/b761724de390b75b26639e3515f5da975a70e2f99f565cca072b968e8e67eb0e

The output of 0.00075000 BTC came from the deposit of 0.001 BTC, which had a 5% so that resulted in 0.00095 BTC - 0.0002 BTC = 0.00075 BTC, this could have been avoided by you if the fee was 0.000019 instead of 0.00002, it's pretty unrealistic to expect the user to perform that calculation especially if modifying their deposit amount will result in leaving dust, and these things do happen on random bases even though not so often.

Example: sending 0.10329897 with 3% will result in an output of 0.1 BTC, and thus, adding a simple function that checks for the final output and adjusts the fees accordingly would be a good addition.


Also once you click on that exponential mark to view the warning, there is just no way of getting rid of it unless you refresh the page!


- My initial pick is 19 minutes, and that matches what is in the letter of guarantee

Signed message: We hereby confirm that [banned mixer] has generated the address bc1q6tcjl4tw9z68fqdly8me70vkt93e5aj47n7t6k in order to transfer incoming amount (minus fee) to the following addresses: 100% to bc1qjnwttvr2uvqyc9g42nfcv4y65zwu67klk7ecwm after 19 min

However, the timer on the website is showing 1h.17mins (not sure why)






Mix #3 :

Postive Notes:

- I tried to time the receiving of this mix to match the receiving of the second transaction of the first mix, just to see if one of the deposit addresses would be used for the other transaction, I received both transactions within 9 minutes difference and they were not related.

Negative Notes:

In this transaction https://blockchair.com/bitcoin/transaction/c9a3b09f602b02c433f11fed1e5cc5c1e1207c8c71b34539b0e01445eb04f2db

I see that you did two things:

1- You consolidated 3 smaller outputs that were not needed

This input > bc1qkpgugjv55lp0my23m0txn0azww5rvxwyf8qh5p of 0.00022350 is clearly the change address of this transaction
https://blockchair.com/bitcoin/transaction/29cecb7abf2b2455ac842f0f2ca20bc64eeafa650244f100dc2ec248549de845

Which came from this address bc1qmtxzrvnzr3ryak5jeprz3eqqsgpq9t4hzvd2g5

the same address that was used to fund my first mix address (bc1qpshee3qva79zxqllgm8z7lxtk556793c4crhkj).

By doing this you revealed that all of these were change addresses owned by you

Code:

bc1qpw90m6znhrv9rpks6kfcrv06sl244megp0n7yr
0.00023799 BTC
6.85 USD
bc1qjjksuengqn64k50apyq26xrxy09k9fhl7q2nkm
0.00022350 BTC
6.00 USD
bc1qkpgugjv55lp0my23m0txn0azww5rvxwyf8qh5p

You did all this despite the fact that this output (bc1q5cjh3h6pv2aexgy9ee6mq9l3lcuyg8aursvv2r is 0.00120709) which is more than enough for my deposit, what is the reasoning behind doing this? I can see that you consolidated all of them to a P2SH address which makes it look like it's not the change address but rather mine (unless of course it was actually another client's address since it's higher than 0.00075 BTC we can't tell), but I still don't understand the logic behind doing this in a transaction you are mixing for the client, interested in hearing your mixed input.


General Positive Notes:

- Overall the mixer is easy to use.
- The process is fast and the website is not laggy even running on Tor behind a VPN.
- The GUI is nice and pleasant to the eye.

General Negative Notes:

- I don't like the security level options, it's complicated for the average user, and there should be only one type of mixing, a mixing that works, and the fees to be different only in regards to the outgoing transaction network fee, not that actually privacy result.
- The website should be translated into more languages, personally, I'd like to see it support Arabic.

[1714595485]

1714595485

[1714595485]

1714595485

[1714595485]

1714595485

[tumbler.io]

Mikeywithm,
Thank you for your review
Replied in the message.

[xLays]

Bitcointalk username: xLays
Bitcointalk Rank: Senior Member
Lifetime earned merit: 332
Bech32 address: bc1qva3ug6vuup8kfd6s9tm04gla6kxpt854rjem4kx97chq30c7jsfst4hmsg

[Faisal2202]

Bitcointalk username: Faisal2202
Bitcointalk Rank: Senior
Lifetime earned merit: 387
Bech32 address: bc1q405q7232hjq4jc8u8txx44379ejes7ckuzv8c7

I was reviewer of Phase 1, applying for phase 2, would love to test it again.

[ZAINmalik75]

Bitcointalk username: ZAINmalik75
Bitcointalk Rank: Hero
Lifetime earned merit: 512
Bech32 address: bc1qx5yc6jtjh4jupqn0p2cmufe8twc76dy680xt2k

[Bushdark]

Bitcointalk username: Bushdark
Bitcointalk Rank: Senior Member
Lifetime earned merit: 260
Bech32 address: bc1q4xrr0v2yu65x4k6s7l89rvh7m4sskrk5mk2rxx

[un_rank]

Bitcointalk username: un_rank
Bitcointalk Rank: Hero Member
Lifetime earned merit: 593
Bech32 address: bc1qcj739rwkf6lx3e94kc7uswxzvwks6y7mt3pgss

- Jay -

[BlackHatCoiner]

[banned mixer] Mixer Review Program #2
Bitcointalk username: BlackHatCoiner

I'll start with mixing this time. I'll check if you've taken into consideration my previous concerns, and will talk about it at the end of this review.

Browser: Tor v13.0.

Security level: Premium.

Mixing 1 mBTC.
Receiving in: bc1q9a4vsffut6h9awp8ggcfz7jlq7lgs07yl0yce5 (67.56%), bc1qcerxjz8p24rhgdqd0paq3s4p4ere3hgvm8wl00 (32.44%).
Service fee: 3.60%
Anonymizing meter signals "strong".

Let's valuate this mixing now it's done.

Code:

                     (#1 withdrawal)
                      ┌───────────┐
                  ┌──►│bc1q...yce5│       (random tx)
┌─────────────┐   │   └───────────┘       ┌───────────┐
│bc1q...t0cfq8├───┤                   ┌──►│bc1q...ldq8│        (mixer change)
└─────────────┘   │   ┌───────────┐   │   └───────────┘        ┌───────────┐
                  └──►│bc1q...7vr5├───┤                    ┌──►│bc1q...ha03│
                      └───────────┘   │   ┌───────────┐    │   └───────────┘
                     (mixer change)   └──►│bc1q...rf5j├────┤
                                          └───────────┘    │   ┌───────────┐
                                                           └──►│bc1q...wl00│
                                                               └───────────┘
                                                              (#2 withdrawal)

- #1 withdrawal TX: 978c20822b02efd140a4c13ac1c2026aec7df2cd4e3b89795549734b8c5a3b7f-
- random TX: eadee4abdc7fd80bbfe56694fb6528e165542b25f40fc4ba9894376c471fc0e5
- #2 withdrawal TX: af9a530e368d89c120e9bf6f99beb6ac89edd5a342fc600b75220d93bcfecd41

Again, not strong anonymity. Rather poor. Receiving addresses literally have blockchain connection. You should never use the change of one mixing for another receiving address of mine. Not having a blockchain connection is the whole point of separate addresses, otherwise I can do that too in my own wallet. The difference this time is that you added a random TX (as I demonstrate) in the middle, but it's still very poor mixing and any regular coinjoin would provide better anonymity set than that.

Security level: Standard.

Mixing 1 mBTC.
Receiving in: bc1qpnr87nuqar0vw0x62zvqfj747shpkpltp6jx2l.
Service fee: 1.80%
Anonymizing meter signals "fair".

This one is just a regular transaction: ec9ebe0cba4806a43a2f88a1f57e87fcdf274af3c739a3d3c411a77f7c53be53. I did check its coin history, it doesn't have any blockchain connection with the previous mixing, so I guess not great not terrible.

I will retry mixing with standard, just to see if this one there will be blockchain connection. I will be using the exact same parameters.

Security level: Standard.

(second attempt, using Chromium 118.0.5993.88)
Mixing 1 mBTC.
Receiving in: bc1qfgf9hs90fjr8kwn3mgnkce45l7ymteee6gxm43.
Service fee: 1.80%
Anonymizing meter signals "fair".

Mixing done, withdrawal transaction is this: 36816f0c75595b4b5bfa71123c54e1798fb5606271af96d2221e8c10d6dc959d.

There is no blockchain connection with the previous mixing as far as per my block explorer goes. So, tumbler code must be working as expected.


Let me return back to my concerns. You responded me in your ANN thread, so I want to confirm you've actually fixed these things you said. I'm going to ignore Javascript, as I don't exactly know your setup, even though I'll once again advice you to let the people audit the code if you're planning this mixer to go big.

We've made significant improvements to our FAQ section

I checked it, and indeed. You've actually made it look more professional now. I don't have anything else to suggest about FAQ.

Our system distributes coins using 96 different sending patterns, and yep, that includes sending from various address types. We're all about upping that anonymity game.

Yes, but I think you've missed my point. When I receive mixed coins, I want them to looked mixed. The point of using a mixer is to improve fungibility, and the only manner to accomplish that is to make fungible mixed outputs. You do improve privacy by obscuring the coin history, don't get me wrong, but chain analysis companies should get a clear signal that once you deposit, that the particular coin is, not only changing hands, but enters an a pool of mixed coins. For instance, a large coinjoin is clearing up that it's a large coinjoin. Coinjoin solutions such as whirlpool, don't try to hide the fact that you're making a coinjoin, and neither should you. Look on what ChipMixer did, it used fungible chips, which made outsiders treat each equally.

I hope you do acknowledge now, I'll be happy to continue this conversation in your ANN thread if you want.

Please note that the funds you received were from an address with a much larger sum than you requested for withdrawal. By structuring our pool into levels and using various sources of coins, we aim to protect our pool from de-anonymization, making it more costly to attack. This approach enhances the overall security and privacy of our service.

Please note that your prioritization should be to protect the user. The user doesn't know your setup. They simply send and receive, expecting you did your job. If the user sends a small amount of bitcoin, then you should take care to use a smaller pool of your coins (if sending from large-sum pool is a problem). Otherwise increase your minimum deposit.

The minimum receiving address fee is "one of the methods" to protect our pools from de-anonymization, the primary function of which is to make such an attack as expensive as possible.

Again, I don't understand. How does charging exactly 20,000 sat protect your pool from de-anonymization? You're discouraging the user from splitting their mixed coins, which is a very bad practice. Nobody is going to pay 200,000 sat, just to receive their mixed coins in 10 separate addresses, which is just bad, as receiving in multiple addresses, in various time periods significantly strengthens privacy. They'll most likely stick with just 1 receiving address, which is much easier to de-anonymize.


Unresolved concern: privacy policy.

Privacy policy
I'm a little bit hesitant to using this mixer after reading its privacy policy. So, I'm basically agreeing that [banned mixer] implements coin filtering and I'm forbidden to using it if my coins are included in some illegal activity. I'd expect better policy from a service that is trying to enhance Bitcoin's privacy (and coincidentally, its fungibility).

/terms]4. PROHIBITED ACTIVITIES and COIN FILTERING

You accept not to engage "The Service" in any illegal activity or not to use "The Service" to adversely affect the performance or provision of services by "The Service". In addition, You accept not to use any Bitcoin created, received, or granted in exchange for or as a result of any illegal activity in "The Service".

[...]

COIN FILTERING

"The Service" may carry out verification and control of illegal activities with the help of a third party under a contract. "The Service" may terminate Your access to "The Service" with immediate effect for any reason - including, but not limited to, illegal or prohibited activities, at its sole discretion, and is not obligated to reveal the details of its decision.
You accept that "The Service's" decision to take certain actions, including termination for any reason at its sole discretion, may be based on confidentiality criteria that are necessary for "The Service's" security protocols and risk management. You accept "The Service" is not obligated to reveal to you the particularities of its security and risk management processes.

In addition, the user has to accept that they will not be revealed the reason their coins were rejected. I want more information and explanation on this. Why are you doing it? Bitcoins are fungible. Why do you treat the currency as non-fungible? It harms it as currency. How can the user trust a service with the aim to improve fungibility if the service itself doesn't treat it likewise? And which is the procedure followed if you deem their coins as "tainted"? Do you return them back to their address? The user will hesitate to using this, if there's a chance to confiscate their money (which seems to be).

[tumbler.io]

BlackHatCoiner,
Again, not strong anonymity.

Answer

[paid2]

[banned mixer] Mixer Review Program #2
Bitcointalk username: iwantmyhomepaidwithbtc2

Browsers used :
-Mix 1 :Chromium Version 118.0.5993.70 (Official Build)
-Mix 2 : Tor 13.0
-Overall experience : I checked all the pages of the site with the two browsers mentioned above +  Firefox 115.3.1esr (64 bits) on Debian and under Android with Firefox Focus 119.0

MIX 1

With Chromium (and Firefox) I couldn't access the captcha and couldn't use the mixer. I deleted my cookies, refreshed the page, took into consideration your reply to mikeywith and stayed on the page while it loaded, but still the same problem. I tried with "private"/"incognito" window, same issue again. Not sure what was the problem, I never had this kind of issue with a captcha before. I encountered this problem yesterday too, when I tried to test your service, and it seems to be persistent on my end.



I had no problems with Tor browser, everything seems to work well:



So, let's go with Tor browser! I wanted to do the test with Chromium and Firefox, but it's not working at the moment. So I'm going to do the test with Tor, and try later when the problem is solved.

The coins will be sent from this address : bc1qv7e20dtpsxjfncsmrlpyym9tzhyg8cmdpv20xc

Receiving addresses :
-28,99% to bc1qmcs2xplsyd62668gshh46ft2fsru0hjjn84vx8
-40,26% to bc1ql3vktvycm4rerdfwfg390xmmpxqf50mtnmvvyu
-30,75% to bc1qp85cz7z6saywglesa8mnn5cnn7snr4z63m4y5h

Security Level : Premium
Service fee : 3,96%

Delay :
-1h55 min for bc1qmcs2xplsyd62668gshh46ft2fsru0hjjn84vx8
-5h47min for bc1ql3vktvycm4rerdfwfg390xmmpxqf50mtnmvvyu
-8h58min for bc1qp85cz7z6saywglesa8mnn5cnn7snr4z63m4y5h

Amount : 0.00119326 BTC

Code:

-----BEGIN LETTER OF GUARANTEE-----
Signed message: We hereby confirm that [banned mixer] has generated the address bc1qnma78acuajkdt3ljulkyxetx95xc63pq04d4z6 in order to transfer incoming amount (minus fee) to the following addresses: 28.99% to bc1qmcs2xplsyd62668gshh46ft2fsru0hjjn84vx8 after 114 min., 40.26% to bc1ql3vktvycm4rerdfwfg390xmmpxqf50mtnmvvyu after 344 min., 30.75% to bc1qp85cz7z6saywglesa8mnn5cnn7snr4z63m4y5h after 538 min. This service will be only available for all bitcoins received from 2023 October 24, 17:36:31 UTC to 2023 October 25, 17:36:31 UTC with minimum amount of 0.00119326 BTC per single transaction and maximum amount of 10 BTC total. Our fee is 3.96% + 0.0002 BTC for every target address. This letter is digitally signed by our main account: 1TUMBLRXHDjFZacmFLbuDn2Rw1rcPgacR. Order: https://[banned mixer]/order#4AK4U48O-5G7FSI. Stay protected and thank you for using our service.
Bitcoin address: 1TUMBLRXHDjFZacmFLbuDn2Rw1rcPgacR
Signature: HOvXGfY8ojfciS54/TTyUYqCF59eBhZjNKGxC/GB0EVbR2xudshMsvF53tDEoN4Ow+rIVnBHzvb1g6F1q9NFGBc=
-----END LETTER OF GUARANTEE-----

Delay:



As you can see above, the delay were respected.

For the third transaction, fees were very overpaid : 42,9 sat/vB instead of 13 sat/vB on average in block 813711 9bb1bce5d459b07b2457c3e1058b061e1cb78c3fe7d12219599ba97e01891c8b

But that's not a big deal, the first two were optimal. I didn't find my own address when checking on a explorer the source of the coins.

MIX 2

For this one I used the Tumbler code provided in my previous session.

The coins will be sent from this address : bc1q2ff6p8n7j8th9jyk3lzs3xcne8rkf28tavw5rw

Receiving addresses :
-100% to bc1qzpda8ykfdl6gqlen8vh290u8ly8rmzkkx8hgky

Security Level : Standard
Service fee : 1,89%

Delay :
-5h06min

Amount : 0.00148455 BTC

Code:

-----BEGIN LETTER OF GUARANTEE-----
Signed message: We hereby confirm that [banned mixer] has generated the address bc1qtfvc8ztnvrlfj0nk98f452rhs60n78n0l8drwg in order to transfer incoming amount (minus fee) to the following addresses: 100% to bc1qzpda8ykfdl6gqlen8vh290u8ly8rmzkkx8hgky after 306 min. This service will be only available for all bitcoins received from 2023 October 24, 19:15:15 UTC to 2023 October 25, 19:15:15 UTC with minimum amount of 0.001 BTC per single transaction and maximum amount of 10 BTC total. Our fee is 1.89% + 0.0002 BTC for every target address. This letter is digitally signed by our main account: 1TUMBLRXHDjFZacmFLbuDn2Rw1rcPgacR. Order: https://[banned mixer]/order#QQODJGGM-31ECOW. Stay protected and thank you for using our service.
Bitcoin address: 1TUMBLRXHDjFZacmFLbuDn2Rw1rcPgacR
Signature: HNYjZoObY710PsfUaNF9/dqSvr0Qm9ZxXDIRp3+8dGWXBxyA2DM6iC3vdJ1HvvdwGXVoGkx0oR0bUwGkxhnfWXI=
-----END LETTER OF GUARANTEE-----

Delay:



Above, you can see the whole history for the test 2. As you can see, the transaction arrived on time (+10 minutes, so exactly the average block confirmation's time needed), and everything was flawless. I'm not a blockchain analyst, but looking with Crystal explorer I couldn't find my own address.
I sent 0.00148455 BTC and received 0.00125649 ; which is fine.

Transaction fees were a little overpaid 40 sat/vB instead of approximately 20 sat/vB https://mempool.space/tx/259a247900a398b3087b9eb018a81ac5c1474097e53fbd11032d48fa6586ae5d


I'm now going to share with you my overall experience of using the product, as well as my various comments and questions.

About the mixing process :

Despite the problems of using your services outside the Tor browser, I found the steps of mixing extremely user-friendly, everything clear and well organized. It's one of the most pleasant mixers I've ever used. Your site updated itself almost instantly when my items entered the mempool, it's very responsive.

I like the Anonymizing meter, it's very user friendly:



It's good that users must tick the conditions + the reminder to download the letter of guarantee before everything else. Well done.


During the step 4 this informations appears and it is well managed, I find it very easy to read :


Once the mixing process is complete, I appreciated the suggestion to "Delete immediately" the order, which is good.



Before testing the mixing process, I began by exploring every aspect of the site, as I usually do when I come across a mixer I don't know.

I really like the design of your site, it's clear and modern.
Your website is responsive, I had no slowness of any kind, no matter what web-browser I used. The fact that you've integrated a dark mode is great. It's one of the most user-friendly mixer websites I've ever tried on Android, kudos for the mobile version! 

However, my first impression was mitigated : I told myself that if I had to discover Tumbler randomly -outside the context of this review-, I'd wonder if the service was still active, and if a team was still really in charge of it.

Despite the beauty of the site, I had a sort of "ghost town" feeling when I was browsing on the site... Let me explain why :

The support can't be contacted :



Same issue with Chromium and Firefox :

Code:

 An error has occurred. Please refresh the page and try again. 

I've tried two days in a row and the problem persists, and I've also refreshed the page several times and the same problem persists.

Your Twitter account is empty, no avatar, no post.
I'm not sure it's right for you to leave this X account linked to your site, it gives an impression of being left behind. You could share on X your blog articles for example. I guess it's not -of course- the number one priority, but any sign of activity is a plus when it comes to building trust.



Apparently, you have no active online presence outside your website and your Bitcointalk account.

Okay, it's not a big deal if you take these elements one by one, but as a whole, they give an impression of incompleteness.
In a sector where trust and reputation are essential, all these elements could lead new users to refuse to take risks, and to go and see some other platform. For example, showing signs of activity outside of your blog (which has irregular activity too) on Twitter, Discord or Telegram could be a real plus for federating a community of users and to reassure them. If I'd needed to contact the support, I'd have had to go to the FAQ, dig around and find your e-mail address. It would be nice to update the dedicated page. The fact that you are reactive on Bitcointalk is a big plus, but in my opinion, to reach more users, you need something extra. I know that multiplying accounts on social medias means multiplying risks (impersonation etc..), but it should be possible to find a good balance between online activity/presence and risks.

Other comments and suggestions :

FAQ
Your FAQ seems to be quite complete and precise, the information is clear, and I can't think of anything in particular to suggest to change about it.

Terms and Conditions :
Also, I've spent some time exploring your "Terms and Privacy" page.
I have some questions about the "Coin Filtering" part:

"The Service" may carry out verification and control of illegal activities with the help of a third party under a contract. "The Service" may terminate Your access to "The Service" with immediate effect for any reason - including, but not limited to, illegal or prohibited activities, at its sole discretion, and is not obligated to reveal the details of its decision.
You accept that "The Service's" decision to take certain actions, including termination for any reason at its sole discretion, may be based on confidentiality criteria that are necessary for "The Service's" security protocols and risk management. You accept "The Service" is not obligated to reveal to you the particularities of its security and risk management processes.

Are we supposed to understand that you could collaborate with blockchain analysis companies if it was requested? Or some my data could be shared to a third-party company? In any case, at first glance it seems rather vague. If you could reassure us about this point, that would be welcome.

Fees BTC
I use mixers regularly, of course I look how much cost the fees, but to be honest, I'm willing to pay the price of privacy; I've paid up to 4-5% in the past, which is why I find your fees reasonable (even if from a personal point of view I'm not a big fan of a fixed amount of BTC + x% and I like to have a percentage only, but that's personal). It's not cheap, but it's not expensive either, when compared with some of others mixing platforms. All good.

I'd like to make it clear that for this test, I wasn't looking to save on fees or anticipate them at all, I wanted to test the service with small amounts so this is necessarily disproportionate. A regular user would of course take more care not to send such a small amount with 3 output addresses.

Translations :
I can only check the French language, but I'd like to point out that the site's translation is more than a little unreliable.

It looks like it's been translated with GPT or an automatic translation tool. Most of the mistakes are in the FAQ, but the whole site has issues with the translation. For example some terms are translated in a literal way when it doesn't apply at all in the context of crypto mixing ("pièce" for Bitcoin, "code a tambour" for Tumbler code, for example, but there are many more).

If other languages have been translated in the same way, I'd advise you to recheck everything when you can.

Conclusion

You seem to be very responsive to the feedback you receive, so I'm not worried about the small accessibility problems I've encountered, I imagine they'll be quickly rectified.

Otherwise, I think the site could be more complete, especially from the point of view of branding your service. Nevertheless, it's been a pleasure to navigate, and use your site and service. I found it intuitive, fast, and the service was done as stipulated in the letter of guarantee.

I would like to thank you for giving me the opportunity to test your service, and to give you my comments and suggestions. I remain at your disposal if you want to discuss anything about this review.

[internetional]

[banned mixer] Mixer Review Program #2
Bitcointalk username: internetional

Why do people need mixers

Since the widespread adoption of the Lightning Network, the need for mixers as a way to obscure information about where and how many bitcoins I transfer has diminished. Now, if I require privacy regarding bitcoin spending directions, I simply place my bitcoins in a payment channel, and no one can see how I spend them. Lightning Network is faster than mixers and more secure (with no trust element), making it difficult for mixers to compete. The exception is large transfers. Sending them via the Lightning Network can be challenging, so here, a mixer may be needed to maintain privacy.

However, in modern conditions, the primary purpose of mixers for me is to conceal large sums that I receive, not the ones I send. If a substantial amount comes to me and everyone can see it, it might attract the attention of malicious actors. Therefore, it's better to hide significant sums.

Additionally, I suspect that mixers might be used by individuals who have illicitly obtained bitcoins somewhere and are trying to cover their tracks. Finally, mixers are likely in demand among those who steal fiat money and then convert it into bitcoins. Such individuals may also need to sever the connection between the coins.

Based on the above, when getting acquainted with a mixer, my primary objective is to understand its target audience:
1. those who want to keep their transfers private,
2. individuals who don't want to expose large sums of incoming funds to potential malicious actors,
3. or criminals who steal Bitcoins or fiat money and are attempting to cover their tracks.

The first target group, those who require privacy in their transfers, typically seek low fees (ideally not higher than what's offered in the Lightning Network) and high transaction volumes. The minimum fee on [banned mixer], at 0.4% plus 20,000 satoshis per receiving address, is noticeably higher than the fees on the Lightning Network. The claimed volume goes up to 10 BTC. However, it seems that the service owners themselves are not very confident that users will trust a mixer with such high volumes. They acknowledge in the FAQ that entrusting a substantial sum to a mixer can be challenging and recommend breaking it down into less critical portions for the client. From this, it appears that [banned mixer] may not offer anything exceptional to potential clients interested in private transfers.

The second target group, those who want incoming bitcoins to be completely unlinked, indeed align with much of the information on the [banned mixer] website. The entire mixing process in [banned mixer] seems tailored to achieving this goal. The mixer's developers suggest sending each received amount to multiple addresses, utilizing delays before sending, and employing codes to ensure there is no connection between the sent and received coins. It appears that [banned mixer] and I share the same understanding of the primary purpose of mixers in modern conditions. [banned mixer] is primarily focused on providing precisely the services I would expect from a mixer.

But there is one detail that makes me wonder if [banned mixer] might consider people who want to cover their criminal tracks as part of their target audience, and that's the fees. On one hand, it's very useful that you can specify custom fees for each mixing transaction. If in one case, you receive 0.40% less from the mixer than what you sent, in another case 0.41% less, and in a third case 0.42% less, it introduces additional entropy into the data and makes it even more challenging to trace connections between the coins. But who and why would give the mixer 1.8% (the lower limit for the Standard level), 3.6% (the lower limit for the Premium level), and especially 5%?! In my opinion, only scammers and thieves who are willing to pay for silence, meaning complicity in their crimes, would do so. If the mixer itself suggests setting such a fee, it may mean it is willing to serve those who are ready to pay it.

Indeed, using such a mixer raises not only moral questions but also potential financial risks. If the mixer becomes entangled in criminal activities, it's only a matter of time before it gets caught. At that very moment, your order might be in progress, and you could be left without your bitcoins. It's essential to exercise caution and due diligence when choosing a mixer to minimize these risks.

My recommendation to the mixer would be not to allow customers to set such high fees, like 1.8%, 3.6%, and especially 5%. These fees are excessively high for the average bitcoin user and may not appear as fees for privacy but rather as fees for money laundering. It's crucial to strike a balance between privacy and reasonable fees to ensure the service is used for legitimate purposes and not misused for illegal activities.

My expectations based on previous reviews

Since this is the second round of reviews, I've reviewed the feedback from the first campaign to understand what I should expect from the [banned mixer] mixer and what aspects to pay attention to.

Reading the reviews from the first campaign, I've noted the following critical points:

1. Terminology and promises. [banned mixer] makes bold statements like "absolute security and reliability" and "the most reliable Bitcoin Mixer and Tumbler service in the world." However, these claims lack a factual basis. Mixers operate in a legal gray area, and there are no guarantees that they will fully protect your funds. [banned mixer] doesn't adequately warn users about the risks associated with mixer use and the need for appropriate precautions.
2. Terms of service. [banned mixer]'s terms of service include a clause stating that the service may share your data with third parties for illegal activity checks. This could jeopardize your anonymity.
3. Address types. [banned mixer] does not always use native SegWit addresses, potentially reducing the level of transaction anonymity.
4. Address reuse. [banned mixer] may reuse the same address for multiple transactions, making your transactions more traceable.

After using the mixer, I can say the following regarding these observations.

The bold and unsubstantiated claims do not immediately catch one's eye. Yes, they are present, but they are usually tucked away in sections of the text that I tend not to read thoroughly. I typically view this text as marketing content and tend to skim through it. It required a deliberate effort on my part to locate these statements. I presume that other users might not stumble upon them unless actively seeking them out. Therefore, I do not perceive these claims as a significant issue.


As for the concern about permitting the sharing of user data with third parties, I hold a different perspective. The service's owners themselves are essentially unknown entities. By using the service, users already transmit information about their addresses and transactions to unfamiliar parties. Information is exposed not when [banned mixer] transfers it to another entity, but rather when users disclose it to the mixer.

In my transactions with [banned mixer], both premium and basic, I did not notice [banned mixer] using non native SegWit addresses. Furthermore, [banned mixer] handled the sending of coins to a Taproot address quite well. So, it appears that this issue has likely been resolved.

I didn't encounter the issue of address reuse in my transactions with [banned mixer] either. All the addresses provided to me were used for the first time. In fact, I don't see anything inherently problematic in reusing an address, especially with a mixer where different individuals use it at different times. For those attempting to trace transactions, address reuse makes it even more confusing.

Overall, I didn't come across the expected issues, and it seems that the service handles these aspects well.

My personal experience

My first attempt at mixing was on my iPad through the privacy-focused browser Orion (browser.kagi.com), but it was unsuccessful.

Firstly, pop-up information elements obstructed essential parts of the interface and didn't disappear as expected.
They remained on the screen even after moving to the next section of the form.


Secondly, I couldn't download the guarantee letter. Clicking the download link resulted in an error message.

Without the guarantee letter, I was hesitant to proceed with the mixing. So, I switched to the Chrome browser and completed all the necessary steps there, and everything went smoothly.

For my second mixing attempt, I used an Android phone with the Kiwi browser. Kiwi didn't present any issues, but using the website on a phone was not the most convenient experience. The most inconvenient aspect was that all mixing settings are adjusted using sliders, and on a small screen, this can be cumbersome. It would be much more user-friendly if the website allowed users to input values numerically for parameters like the fee percentage, the fraction of coins sent to each address, and the delay time. Trying to hit the exact value you want with sliders can be frustrating.


Comparing to other mixers

The interface issue mentioned earlier (lack of numeric input fields) appears to be common among many mixers. It might be intentional, as entering numbers may not be as secure as using sliders. However, if that's not the case, addressing this interface shortcoming could make using [banned mixer] on a phone more convenient than many other mixers.

The lower minimum acceptable fee on [banned mixer] is certainly a competitive advantage. However, it's essential to note that there are mixers that don't charge an additional fee for each new receiving address, and under specific configurations, using such mixers might be more cost-effective.

Having the website available in eight languages is a significant advantage, exceeding the language support of many popular mixers.

Starting mixing after just one confirmation is also an important advantage. However, it's crucial to send coins to the provided address within 24 hours, and it's unclear what is considered the moment of sending: the first blockchain confirmation or the detection of the transaction in the mempool. It's indeed strange that this information is absent on websites of other mixers as well. Adding this clarity would make [banned mixer] even more user-friendly compared to its competitors.

Overall, I didn't find any specific aspects in [banned mixer] that would set it apart from its competitors in a negative way. On the contrary, most of the differences seem to favor [banned mixer].

[SamReomo]

[banned mixer] Mixer Review Program #2
Bitcointalk username: SamReomo

In order to review the [banned mixer] I used three different browsers to test the mixer. I used Microsoft Edge Version 118.0.2088.61 for 1st mixing test, Tor Version 12.5.5 for 2nd mixing test, and Firefox Version 119 for 3rd mixing test. I have viewed the pages first in all of the browsers and checked the UI of the website before doing any mixing and I can say that the site loaded flawlessly, and the UI was professionally made. I used premium mixing security level two times as that one was mandatory for the review so I thought why not to use it for both tests and I used standard security level for the third mixing test. The mixing process went smoothly without any issues with two browsers but in third browser and I had encountered a minor issue.

General Introduction to [banned mixer]

The [banned mixer] is a mixer site that’s for the users who want to have untraceable Bitcoin transactions. The [banned mixer] provides solutions for the users who want to mix up their Bitcoin and make those untraceable. The main purpose of such mixers is to increase the anonymity of the coins so no one can trace that who owns those coins. The [banned mixer] works in the simplest way possible, and the site offers 3 simple steps to make your coins untraceable. The step-1 is to deposit your Bitcoin into the deposit address that [banned mixer] generates for you, and in the step-2 the [banned mixer] mix up your Bitcoin for you and in step-3 they will send the untraceable Bitcoin into your wallet address or addresses that you added as receiving address or addresses during the mixing process. All of those steps are explained in [banned mixer]’s site in detail so I won’t go deep to explain those in details in this review. The minimum deposit for using of [banned mixer]’s mixing service is 0.001 BTC and the minimum service fee is 0.4% which is really impressive. They promise smart anonymity and they claim that no-one will be able to trace the mixed coins and the coins won’t be linked with the coins that the user deposits.

The Site Design and User Interface

First of all I must say that the design of the [banned mixer] is quite impressive and it’s better than other mixers in design and loading speeds. Another important thing I noticed is the loading speed of the site, it’s way faster in loading than other competitors because other mixing sites take a lot of time to load on Tor browser but [banned mixer] loads instantly. The design of the site is professionally made and I haven’t noticed any lag whatsoever when browsing the site on Microsoft Edge and on Tor but it was a little bit slow on Firefox. The site offers dark mode and that’s also pretty interesting but I mostly use light mode and that’s why I just used dark mode for testing purpose only but still I can say that dark mode is working perfectly.

The site is available in 8 languages at the time which include English, German, Italian, Russian, French, Japanese, Chinese, and Spanish. The home page of the site loads instantly and the animations appear quickly which is a very positive experience for the users. I have loaded each page of the [banned mixer] including the Support page and I can surely say that the loading speeds of the site are unmatched and no competitor is able to offer such speeds on their sites. The design of the site is eye-catching and everything works flawlessly without any issue. I must say thumbs up for [banned mixer] team for making their site very responsive and eye-catching and user-friendly.

First Mixing, Browser used, Microsoft Edge Version 118.0.2088.61, Security Level: Premium 5% fee

For this mixing I used Edge browser and I used Premium security level at [banned mixer] and set the fee to highest in order to see how it works. For this mixing I sent 0.00102 BTC and I used two receiving addresses for the test. I put the delay of 1 hour and 33 minutes and 51.87% for 1st address and 2 hour 9 minutes and 48.13% for 2nd address. I didn’t applied any Tumbler code this time because I haven’t mixed my coins before with [banned mixer] and after selecting the delay and percentage allocation I was about to receive 0.000569 BTC according to the estimator of [banned mixer] and I selected continue to further proceed the mixing process.

On next page I got the deposit address and a letter of guarantee and I downloaded the letter of guarantee and checked it thoroughly and proceeded with depositing. As soon as I received a confirmation the [banned mixer] prepared the order without any delay and then I waited to see the completion of the mixing. Once the mixing was finished I copied the Tumbler code in order to apply it on my next mixing.

For this mixing I sent 0.00102 BTC from this address bc1qm34lsc65zpw79lxes69zkqmk6ee3ewf0j77s3h to this wallet address bc1qg8vu7p2peh9gd2maxdk8xvm2hgzpmjgujw2cml which was generated by [banned mixer] and I used bc1qthppcsr6gtq929tkdfvsmfpt7shem3skfsyta7 as 1st address and bc1q8n5j8qce8kkzrecl978lfdclf000lgzwjcv2td as 2nd address.

I would say that the [banned mixer] has done the job in the best way possible and there were no problems during mixing and after mixing so I guess anyone can use it without any worries. I’m not a chain analyst or expert at tracing Bitcoin transactions but I tried every possible way to see if I can find a trace of my own coins but surprisingly I wasn’t able to see any trace of my coins. The coins I received were totally different from the coins that I deposited. The mixer has really done its job professionally and I would say that premium mixing at [banned mixer] works in the best way possible. The fees were a little bit higher for such level of mixing and the fee of 0.0002 BTC for each receiving address is high I guess and I recommend [banned mixer] to reduce it in order to get more users on their site.

Second Mixing, Browser used Tor, version 12.5.5, Security level: Premium 3.69% fee

Once my first mix was completed I began my second mixing test and for this test I used Tor browser version 12.5.5 and set the security level to Premium once again this time but with 3.69% as fee instead of 5%. For testing the [banned mixer] on Tor I used the onion version of it. The experience was similar to the clear net version and I had no lagging issues or whatsoever. I used my previous [banned mixer] code in order to avoid getting my own previous coins after the mix and for this test I used a single receiving address only.

Once again I deposited 0.00102 BTC for this test and selected delay time of 2 hour and 59 minutes for this mixing my estimated receiving amount was 0.0078236 BTC and clicked on continue button in order to proceed further. I agreed to the terms and conditions and proceeded to next step of mixing. I downloaded the letter of guarantee once again and gave it a reading. And now I left the mixing process in background and opened it after approximately 3 hours and it was completed successfully. Once again I was amazed with the results of the mixing as it ran flawlessly in background and was completed successfully.

For this mixing I used b75af2768d256bf50346f393d4c40ddf as order code which I got from my previous mixing and I sent 0.00102 BTC from these addresses bc1qm34lsc65zpw79lxes69zkqmk6ee3ewf0j77s3h and bc1qm34lsc65zpw79lxes69zkqmk6ee3ewf0j77s3h to this deposit address bc1qsmx6q29hpzvjde3f085vp58c7gyknmd7l88l92 which was generated by [banned mixer] for mixing purpose and I used bc1qe504atequqk7d6e2f8sywa0hvhha542r9fdpg8 as receiving address.

I tried to trace the address once again in block explorer and I can surely say that it had no connection with my previous coins that I sent for my first mixing. The [banned mixer]’s claims are 100% accurate about the use of code and I confirmed it myself. Although the mixing was done in 3 hours only but still I can say that anonymity levels of the mixing was pretty good and it won’t be easy for anyone to trace it. However, I recommend [banned mixer] team once again to reduce the fee for generation of additional receiving address as the anonymity level will increase very much when multiple receiving addresses are used and with low fee the users will most probably choose multiple addresses instead of one address.

The low fee will allow the users to add more receiving addresses and that will surely add additional anonymity into the process of mixed coins. However, the anonymity levels are still quite good even with two addresses and that’s more than enough for most users who want their coins mixed. I’m quite sure that it would be difficult for normal tech users to trace the users even if the users have used single or multiple addresses however, I don’t know that which technology chain analysis companies use and that’s why I can’t say anything about their tracing levels. But, I still think that they may not be able to trace the users who use [banned mixer]’s Premium security level for mixing of their coins.

Third Mixing, Browser used Firefox version 19.0,  Security level: Standard 1.85% fee

This is the third time I'm using the [banned mixer] mixer and this time I used Firefox to test the mixing of the platform. In this test the Captcha page was a little bit lagging for me but I was able to enter the captcha code without any errors. This time I went with Standard mixing security level instead of Premium and I set the fee at 1.85% for this test. The order details page was smooth once again and I was able to thick the terms & conditions without any problem but when I clicked on continue button to go to the next page I got an error.

After that error I refreshed the page and I was taken to "in progress page" without any changes and I continued the mixing by entering 0.00102 BTC for the test and sent Bitcoin to the address provided by [banned mixer]. For this testing I didn't use any order code and I sent 0.00102 Bitcoin to this address bc1q4tp0rf08h8uv907lnayq2mvvzjstulgdqv2hgw and used the following two as receiving addresses bc1qlczvwvjhngzf689qrg9t0unjgcle6mw282c3wx and bc1qd08zfk3cv04vqr6cgl6y27sax77p2rdelkack3 and set the delay of 68 minutes for 1st receiving address and 98 minutes for 2nd receiving address. The process went smoothly once again and I received my mixed coins on time without any delays. The [banned mixer] has done the job in the best way once again and I tried to see that the coins had any connection with my coins but once again it was a smooth mixing without any tracing details.

My Suggestions

1. I recommend [banned mixer] to fix the typo error in languages. When you click on languages you see Germany instead of German which I guess is a typo that needs to be fixed by the [banned mixer] team.

2. Another suggestion I want to give to [banned mixer] team is to reduce the fee of the additional addresses for the users who make minimum deposit as that will be very competitive for other competitors. However, other those I haven’t faced any issue with [banned mixer] and my experience with this mixer went pretty smoothly.

Conclusion

The [banned mixer] delivered their what they promised and I was quite impressed by using this mixer. The mixer that [banned mixer] has made is surely somewhat different from other mixers and the best thing I noticed about them is their site's design, user-friendliness, and fast loading speeds. I must say that it's the most responsive mixer for the users who want to mix their coins on Tor. Overall, I have spend two days with this mixer and I can surely say that it was a great user experience and I hope that Tumbler team will consider my suggestions.

[KingsDen]

[banned mixer] Mixer Review Program #2
Bitcointalk username: KingsDen

 INTRO: 

Firstly, I really commend Royse777 and the [banned mixer] team for the initiative of double review of the [banned mixer] mixer project. This is a clear indication that [banned mixer] is really prepared to give her best to the bitcoin community and all who will use their services. The end product of these reviews will be excellence because; What the first set of reviewers observed are corrected and returned for further review and whatever is not captured in the first review will definitely be captured in the second.
On sensing the uniqueness of this review, I decided not to read through the review of others in order to come up with something unique as regards my experience in the [banned mixer] mixer compared with other mixers I have used.

  WEBSITE REVIEW 

I made the whole review from mobile, since I have been away from home for over 4 days. Having known that more than 55% internet traffic come from mobile phones, so it is not an error to review from the mobile. Reviewing from  Xiaomi phone of 6.97 inches.

• [banned mixer] mobile UI is awesome. The are no shouty colours which makes me to spend very limited time on websites. The position of the dark/light switch is cool as it is always hidden in some websites, that I will begin to wish it was dark by default.
• The user friendliness of the website is top-notch. The only requirement is just to know how to scroll, next and back, you are good to go.
• Another plus is the "Mix Now" button available at every page. Not to make us forget the reason we visited the website.
• In the image below, there are places to paste multiple output addresses. Will it be possible to have code scanner there, incase one may not copy and paste.
  
• The font of the bulb icon on the mobile view should be reduced. It's making that particular page not fully mobile responsive unless you switch to landscape.
  
• At the footer of the homepage, I saw the "X" icon, I didn't know what is was doing there until I clicked it and discovered it is a close icon. It will be fine that you use the word "CLOSE" in red colour as the icon doesn't sooth there. It looks like a social media handle icon. Again, the BTC logo representing the bitcointalk community is confusing. I didn't have the idea of what I was going to meet till I clicked it. It might be better if you replace it with BTT and then include other social media handles to make it a natural contac-us page.
  

 ToS 

• 1.5 CHANGES TO THESE TERMS
  "The Service" may change the "Terms and Conditions", including as a result of changes in functions, technology or any law or regulation to which "The Service" is subject, and/or for any other reason. If "The Service" does this, the updated "Terms and Conditions" will be published on the website, including the date of the "Last Update" will be replaced with the corresponding one. ...If You do not accept the adjusted "Terms and Conditions", You must stop using "The Service", otherwise the liability rules set out in Section 1.2 will apply.

  If there is an updated ToS, it should read "New ToS' such that if not checked, the user cannot continue using the service. Casinos are used to manipulating the ToS against gamblers, although that is not popular among mixers

• YOU EXPRESSLY ACKNOWLEDGE THAT "THE SERVICE" DOES NOT GUARANTEE A SUFFICIENT LEVEL OF ANONYMITY FOR THE USER UNDER ANY CIRCUMSTANCES, AS THE ANONYMITY OF THE USER IS HIGHLY DEPENDENT ON OTHER CONCURRENT ACTIONS OF THE USER.

  I read this more than 5 times without proper understanding of it. The essence of using mixers is for anonymity. How then will a mixer tell say that they do not guarantee my anonymity. This is a disclaimer of your core goal. What concurrent actions of the user can we note please?

 MORE FAQs 

• Can I pay as I wish?
• Does [banned mixer] support randomisation of addresses?
• What Browsers do you support?  
• Do I need to register in order to mix?  
• Can I mix to my CEX account?

  SUPPORT  

You need to send a message before you see an option for live support. How about if I get the live chat on a go?
My experience with the support wasn't bad as the support was very responsive. After first mixing from my wallet, I decided to perform second mix from a CEX. Due to I am not used to sending coins from CEX, I thought the high transfer fee would be charged from my balance , not knowing it would be charged from the outgoing BTC. This made me send BTC that is below the min deposit of the mixer.
The support requested to refund me either through the deposit address or any of the recieving addresses and I was refunded.
It is good to note that I had to provide my letter of guarantee to enable customer care handle my case and I also had to copy the support link to continue chat without opening another ticket.
Note: The guarantee letter is important. I wouldn't advice you continue mixing if you cannot download the guarantee letter.

The message subject is predefined. Maybe to enable the sorting of the complaints to different support team members. But I always like open ended subject. And again, when the chat with support wanted to get confusing, I scrolled up to reply/emphasize one particular message, but there was no provision to quote and reply a particular message. That will be fine to ease communication since typing is the only approved means of communication.

 THINGS TO CHECK IN MIXERS BEFORE USAGE AND HOW [banned mixer] FITS IN 

• Speed : The longer the mix delay, the better the anonymity, but the longer the process of mixing, the more risk of exposure. Tumbler got a balance by letting you control this yourself.
• Fees : The fees are fair and within the range of the general mixer fee  
• Anonymity : Good, and also depends on the actions of the user in terms of parameter settings  
• Number of pay out addresses  : Excellent, user controls time delay among addresses
• Security : It is not only about mixing your bitcoin, but also the guarantee of getting your bitcoin back. [banned mixer] is a new player in BTT community,  but they got a positive start in the bitcoin community which is an indication of reliability. However, time will tell
• Withdrawal delay : Good because it is user controlled
• Support: In the trustless technology, you atleast need someone to talk with when things go wrong. [banned mixer] support is active
• Onion support: [banned mixer] supports privacy browsing, which is a big plus  

  PROS 

• Upto 10 withdrawal addresses  
• Pay as you wish  
• No registration before mixing  
• 0.001 min deposit
• User controlled mixing time
• Availability of mixing code to avoid the return of your coin
• No logs policy
• Fair pricing  
• Customisation of mixing parameters
• Letter of guarantee
• Active support
• Multilingual  

 Mix 1 

Browser: Chrome
Security level: Basic
Output: One address
Fee: 1.09%
Experience: It was a good experience as everything went smooth. The parameters displayed on the site matched with the real life experience of mixing. The only place I had a challenge was sending bitcoin from my wallet to the site, which failed countless times.
But it was resolved as soon as I updated my wallet.
The whole process completed by 2hrs 43mins

 Mix 2 

Browser: Opera
Security level: Premium
Output: Two addresses
Fee: 3.60%
Experience: This wasn't as seamless as the first mix because I tried sending BTC from the exchange and I got high fee which made the BTC fall below the minimum required by Tumbler. I had to begin chat with the support. Although, it is part of the experience of the review. But a reminder to send slightly above the minimum requirements would have saved me the stress

  SUGGESTIONS 

• It will be fine if [banned mixer] can state in clear terms the relationship between the amount of fees paid, the delay in mixing and level of anonymity to be attained
• In the future there might be a need to implement a very new thing in mixing bitcoin which I haven't seen other mixers do before. Something like recommending the right parameters of mixing and the data to recommend will come from the reply of the questionnaire given to the user. This might not be necessary for expert users but newbies might like it to be able to know the right parameters to use. If this make sense, I will be able to provide more insight. Else, it should be discarded.

  CONCLUSION 

I had an awesome experience using this mixer. Thanks Royse777 for the opportunity to review this mixer. It has made me discover a new place to mix with ease and from henceforth I will keep using and reviewing this project. I intentionally didn't write any subheading as CONS of the project because the PROS overwhelmed the cons by a larger percentage. Then, there are some important information that should be available to anyone before they mix. Information as;

• The importance of letter of guarantee
• The importance of mixing code
• How necessary it is to deposit above the minimum deposit  

Welldone [banned mixer], I have seen your avatar contest, signature design contest, this shows you will launch your signature campaign soonest. I wish you the best.

[Stalker22]

[banned mixer] Mixer Review Program #2
Bitcointalk username: Stalker22


Bitcoin mixers, or tumblers as some call them, have turned into a must-have tool for peeps who wanna keep their business on the down-low when they are doing transactions with Bitcoin.  In this review, I am gonna explore [banned mixer], one of the newer Bitcoin mixer services out there nowadays. I didnt participate in the first review campaign, so this will be my first time giving them a go.

Now Im no expert, but I know my way around Bitcoin mixers, and I used them quite a few in the past. From what I can tell [banned mixer] seems like a decent way to mix your Bitcoins if you're worried about prying eyes.  Their setup looks slick and they got all the standard mixing options youd expect. I gave their randomize feature a test run with a few tiny payments and it did a nice job shuffling my coins around before sending them back to my wallet. There is still room for improvement, though.

Security and anonymity:

[banned mixer] is a pretty new Bitcoin mixing service. According to whois data, the domain was registered over five years ago, with the registration expiring in 2026. However, profiles on bitcointalk.org and X (formerly Twitter) platforms were created only in September 2023. The Wayback Machine internet archive does not have previous archived versions of the website. The site uses a free Let's Encrypt SSL certificate and relies on JavaScript for site functionality, but I did not notice calls to third-party sites, which is a good thing. They also provide a .onion mirror link for the TOR network, which is almost a mandatory requirement for anyone who values their online privacy and anonymity.

Reliability:

Although it is a relatively new mixer service, and they still dont have a history or reputation that we can take into account, all reviews and user comments so far have been mostly positive. And the service does not have any apparent red flags that we should watch out for. They have active customer support on the site and their representative on the bitcointalk seems knowledgeable and willing to help. For now, it is a good way to start a new business, and the reputation will come with time.

User Experience:

Alright, so let me talk about using this Bitcoin mixer/tumbler. Sometimes, it can be a bit confusing to use these type of services for the first time, especially if you are new to the whole crypto mixing game. However, the good news is that this is not the case with [banned mixer].
 
First off, The user interface on [banned mixer] is clean, intuitive, and user-friendly. They offer the flexibility of selecting from eight different languages, which can be very helpful if English is not your strong point. [banned mixer] also includes an FAQ section, which addresses the most common questions users might have.

The actual mixing process on [banned mixer] is a breeze, involving just five simple steps:

1. Completing the captcha security code.
2. Filling in the necessary order details, which includes an optional Tumbler code, specifying receiving addresses, and selecting the service fee and delay.
3. Agreeing with the terms of service.
4. Creating the order and executing the deposit.
5. Completing the mixing process.

User support:

[banned mixer] offers on-site support through a contact form, allowing users to address any issues or inquiries they may have. Furthermore, you can reach out to their team via BitcoinTalk and Twitter platforms.

Integration with different browsers:

The service is compatible with different web browsers. When evaluating the service, I used four different web browsers (including mobile and TOR browser) and did not encounter any compatibility issues.


Mixing process:

Mix 1
Browser: Tor Browser 13.0.1 (based on Mozilla Firefox 115.4.0)
Order ID: UP5VHAK8-6117ET
Receiving address(es): 1
Security level: Basic
Service fee: 0.44%
Delay: 16 min



Mix 2
Browser: Google Chrome Version 107 (portable version on an old Win7 laptop)
Receiving address(es): 2
Security level: Standard
Service fee: 1.8%
Delay: 0min / 10 min

Mix 3
Browser: Google Chrome Version 118 (mobile Android 13 version)
Receiving address(es): 1
Security level: Premium
Service fee: 3.6%
Delay: 0min

Price and fees:

Flexible Fees - Tumbler. io lets users pick different fees to get more anonymity. The fee structure starts at a minimum of 0.4% for the Basic Level, goes up to 3.6% for the Premium Level, and caps at a maximum fee of 5%. Additionally, a fixed fee of 0.0002 BTC is added to the dynamic portion for each receiving address.

The variable part is pretty good compared to other mixers - one of the best deals out there.  But that 20,000 satoshi fixed fee per address seems a bit high to me. If you are mixing smaller amounts, it could take a huge bite out of your deposit.  

Overall experience

All my mixing processes went smoothly and without errors, no matter what device or web browser I used. The site is very responsive so it displays well on different screen sizes. I like that the system detects the transaction immediately after the coins are sent and the mixing starts immediately after the first confirmation. The only thing I noticed was that for all outgoing transactions, the transaction fee was significantly higher than what the network required at that moment. I suggest you address this issue and find more efficient methods to estimate fees, which would ultimately help you save on the transaction fees you pay.

Positive Points:

• User-Friendly Experience. The website is intuitive and straightforward.
• The website performs impressively well, even when accessed through Tor.
• The GUI is sleek and well-designed, making navigation a breeze.
• Multilingual Support. This is a big plus for those who prefer to interact in their native language.
• The feature to "delete immediately" for completed orders is a welcome addition.
• The dynamic fee structure is highly competitive compared to other mixers.
• The minimum deposit requirement is quite reasonable, allowing users with various budgets to take advantage of the service.

Negative Points:

• Not a big fan of the fixed BTC fee for each withdrawal address. This may not be ideal for users making multiple smaller transactions.
• There is no easyway to retrieve an old order if you accidentally close the page.
• The website needs clearer explanations about "Tumbler code." How it works and what information the system stores.

[examplens]

[banned mixer] Mixer Review Program #2
Bitcointalk username: examplens

I looked at your reports about the changes you implemented and possibly those you don't want to change, which were suggested in the previous review campaign. So I won't go back much on the already mentioned problems here.
I also understood that you give priority to suggestions, so I won't deal with much, we praise what I am satisfied with. And there are a lot of good things here  

Website design and usability

- I noticed that you do not have a custom error 404 page created, as part of an SEO strategy it is desirable to have that.
- I won't dwell too much on this, but I would like to see a bit more contrast in the dark mode
- Is there a possibility to add a paste from the clipboard button in this address box? I think it would make it easier to use, especially for users with mobile devices. (you already have a copy from the clipboard button in the deposit address field)



- A similar option copy transaction ID in clipboard would be welcome in order review if someone still wants to check their transaction further



- I would add a fee calculator on the fee page. The calculator is available only after starting the mixing process and solving the captcha, so why not make it available to new visitors who want to first research all about your service.
- Hint clouds are a bit complicated, actually their closure. If you open two or more, they must be closed only in the reverse order, and only by clicking on the question mark icon. I tried this on a mobile device as well, it could have become almost frustrating.



- I would add in the FAQ that the mixing time starts from the moment of the first confirmation. It seems banal, but for example, the fee varied quite a bit during my process, so the first confirmation came with a lot of delay. Even though your timer works almost perfectly, I wouldn't be surprised to see someone complaining about the delay of your service, while sending Bitcoin at 2 satoshis per byte.
- I am surprised that you maintain the position that a thread on Bitcointalk is sufficient for support. This is one of the good solutions, but if a potential new user gets stuck with a problem, he has to go through registration on the forum (which he may not have wanted). But what if he encounters an additional problem with registration on the forum, he will feel cheated. It is a very realistic scenario, you can find out more here https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=5350381.0
- Support chat looks fun, I like it, but as a solution, it seems slow. For example, I sent a request and received a uniform response that I might have to wait 12 hours. If I have a problem and my funds are stuck with you, I might start to panic. Of course, I won't sit next to the chat for 12 hours, but what if someone calls while I'm away, I'll wait for 12 hours again.
- So, one more support channel is probably mandatory.
- Set up a Twitter account or remove it from the page.

Mixing

- For the first mixing, I used the Opera One(version: 103.0.4928.34) browser
- I used Basic security level, and P2SH as the final destination address
- I think I already suggested this. Without downloading the letter of guarantee, it should not be possible to continue the whole process. I'm sure some don't understand the importance of that.
- In the whole process, I did not come across any unclear steps and everything went without any ambiguities.



- Although it's not a big deal, Blockchair found a privacy issue (I saw that you already shared their report)

Matched addresses identified
Using several indicators we were able to link the similar types of addresses involved in this transaction. We identified which of the recipient addresses possibly belong to one or more senders. Such matching significantly reduces the anonymity of addresses.

- Of course, I did the second mixing using the TOR site
- Now, I use the PREMIUM security level, using two deposit addresses, one bech32 and one taproot.
- I used the mixing code obtained in the previous review campaign and after checking, I did not manage to find a connection with my previous coins, nor in the other transaction.
- Although it is a premium level, I still expected a higher level of anonymity. It is very easy to connect that I received bitcoins from the same source at both addresses. This needs to be improved.



- I'm not sure if it's because I put too short a time gap between the two addresses for the deposit delay. Maybe I should try again, the first transaction to be after 30 minutes and the second after 70 hours. Would that change the matter? If this has an impact, you should mention it during mixing or at least in the FAQ section.
- I think I saw your statement somewhere that you will use all types of addresses to increase the level of anonymity, but on your side, I didn't notice you using any other than bech32. (Correct me if I'm wrong)

I can't resist the feeling that I forgot to write something.   When I remember, I will probably continue in the ANN thread


It was really fun for me to participate in your campaigns, I hope you got useful suggestions.
Good luck with your business.

[Igebotz]

[banned mixer] Mixer Review Program #2
Bitcointalk username: Igebotz

The website overview:

This is my first review of this project and my first visit; the UI/UX design is extremely nice, easy to browse, and the option to change between dark and white mode is what initially draws my attention. Because the other mixers I use do not have this option, you have a +1 edge.


Mixing experience

#Mix 1
Browser used: Mozilla Firefox Browser
version: 118.0.1 ( old version)
system: 64-bit
security level: Basic
Receiving address(s): 1
Amount mixed: 0.003BTC
service fees: 1.76%
order ID: VAGL4GVP-6HL***
Delay time. 59mins


#mix 2
Browser used: Brave Browser
version: Version: 1.3.361.133
system: 64-bit
security level: Premium
Receiving address(s): 1
Amount mixed:  0.003BTC
service fees: 5%
Order ID: 9OJ66AOD-3WM***
Delay time. 1hr:30mins


The process runs smoothly on both browsers, as I had no issues with the site while using these browsers with VPN, but where I had some issues, which is not something I would have done, if I wasn't an experienced user, I would have moved on to the next available mixer that doesn't require me to set up my own mix manually. I'm the type of user who wants whatever I'm paying for to be set up automatically without my intervention (and perhaps an edit button for those who prefer to put it up manually). If I'm paying for the premium service, I expect the system to recommend the ideal mixing time and anonymity level for what I'm paying for rather than requiring me to set it up manually. What's the point of paying for Premium if I can still choose my own level of anonymity? As previously said, a newbie with little experience will ultimately hit a roadblock here.




Letter of Guarantor

The way it's been placed is similar to other mixers I've used, and the way it's been placed one may easily forget to download it; it should be programmed in such a way that downloading it is mandatory before starting to mix. If you want to be the champion in this field, you must do things differently from your competition.

Mixing fees


The premium 5% fees is unusually high; most mixers' higher max is 2.5% - 3%. My current mixer charges a maximum of 2.5%, so why should I pay 5% for your premium service when I am able to pay half that fee elsewhere? What distinguishes your premium service from the competition? This is an honest question, and I need to be convinced of the need to pay 5% for your premium service.

FAQ

I'm not a native English speaker, but I could tell right away that there was a grammatical issue since the original sentence makes no sense. nothing kills me more than grammatical error on a huge project like this. fix it up

After the creation of the order, you will see the minimum and maximum amount for the transaction, which is from 0.001 up to 10 BTC. In case you sent us less than the minimum, that would be concerned that a donation considered as a donation. In case you would like to mix a higher amount, please feel free to contact us through the support form, and we will answer you as soon as possible.

Support.

I got into some minor trouble and chatted with support, it took them some time to respond back after I submitted my letter of guarantor for verification, and when they finally responded, he/she stayed up with me and was very helpful and made everything very clear to me, i got my initial deposit below the minimum deposit back despite a mistake on my end, i input the wrong digit despite it being clearly stated that a deposit below the minimum will be considered as a donation. I'm not sure why you guys didn't follow through on that; I was delighted to get my coin back, but rules are rules, and if you don't have the courage to follow them, don't make them in the first place. That's my principle


Conclusion/recommendation

The site is quick and simple to use, and aside from a few minor issues that I raised, the mixer market is fiercely competitive, and you don't want to leave any stone unattended. Take into account any recommendations and concerns offered.  I'll try it again in a month and then provide honest feedback on Project ANN. Goodluck. This is all for now.

[examplens]

• At the footer of the homepage, I saw the "X" icon, I didn't know what is was doing there until I clicked it and discovered it is a close icon. It will be fine that you use the word "CLOSE" in red colour as the icon doesn't sooth there. It looks like a social media handle icon.
  

This "X" is a new Twitter logo, and here on the Tumbler site, it does not have the function of closing the page. I just checked it myself on a mobile device and clicking on the X takes me to the [banned mixer] Twitter account. Maybe it confused you because a new page opens automatically when you click, that is, the Twitter application.
Just close it and you will be returned to the [banned mixer] site.

[Stalker22]

• At the footer of the homepage, I saw the "X" icon, I didn't know what is was doing there until I clicked it and discovered it is a close icon. It will be fine that you use the word "CLOSE" in red colour as the icon doesn't sooth there. It looks like a social media handle icon.

This "X" is a new Twitter logo, and here on the Tumbler site, it does not have the function of closing the page. I just checked it myself on a mobile device and clicking on the X takes me to the [banned mixer] Twitter account. Maybe it confused you because a new page opens automatically when you click, that is, the Twitter application.
Just close it and you will be returned to the [banned mixer] site.

Yeah. I saw that part of his review too and was confused.  When I went to the Tumber site, it looked fine to me, so thought maybe there was some bug before that Tumber has fixed in the meantime.

Also dont really get the complaint about the BitcoinTalk link. I feel like the Bitcoin logo makes perfect sense there.  No reason to change it to something more confusing when the logo is so familiar already. Using BTT abbreviation  instead could definitely throw some people off.

[KingsDen]

• At the footer of the homepage, I saw the "X" icon, I didn't know what is was doing there until I clicked it and discovered it is a close icon. It will be fine that you use the word "CLOSE" in red colour as the icon doesn't sooth there. It looks like a social media handle icon.
  

This "X" is a new Twitter logo, and here on the Tumbler site, it does not have the function of closing the page.

Yea, it is redirecting to twitter now. As at when I was reviewing the site, it gave a warning to close all sessions when I clicked it.

Also dont really get the complaint about the BitcoinTalk link. I feel like the Bitcoin logo makes perfect sense there.  No reason to change it to something more confusing when the logo is so familiar already. Using BTT abbreviation  instead could definitely throw some people off.

This might not be a trouble to you because you know BTT. A random user might... Besides, I once stumbled on a thread proposing logo for bitcointalk rather than using the general bitcoin logo. It was during the review I appreciated the thread.
When I clicked the bitcoin logo, I expected two things; either to be taken to a bitcoin wallet or to be given a random bitcoin by [banned mixer]  It could literarily mean anything relating to bitcoin. Anyways, that isn't a big issue.[/list]

[Harkorede]

Bitcointalk username: Harkorede
Bitcointalk Rank: Hero Member
Lifetime earned merit: 759
Bech32 address: bc1qaxtu60ryrd0sy9v4478ll0t2wjlvmhya23hh3n