Mixer restrictions

[NotATether]

Ever heard of something called a bank? I am pretty certain no one in the public (except for Government and the banks) would know what your account number is if it wasn't revealed, how much is in your account, where you send your funds to and where you get your fund from... Ain't that right?
Why not use the bank then? Why go through all this headache?

In some third-world countries, criminals bribe a branch worker in the bank to give them the personal information of people with large balances.

You can probably guess what happens next.

In the first-world countries they would just hack a website you paid at to get your card data, then use carding to try to cash out your balance.

So nobody is really safe.

[LoyceV]

I don't really enjoy the fact that anybody that knows my address can know the amount I'm having
Where it goes and where whence it's coming from

Are you saying you reuse the same Bitcoin address for everything? You can largely improve your privacy by using coin control, different addresses and even different wallets for different purposes.

[arabspaceship123]

In some third-world countries, criminals bribe a branch worker in the bank to give them the personal information of people with large balances.

You can probably guess what happens next.

In the first-world countries they would just hack a website you paid at to get your card data, then use carding to try to cash out your balance.

So nobody is really safe.

Criminals want info so nobody is safe. First world countries hack websites or buy info using crypto. Third world countries bribe for personal info on rich people. They want the information so they will pay to hold it.

[Satofan44]

The major reason for all this coin mixing thingy is to avoid scrutiny and abuse of privacy from Government and not a common person like me who doesn't care about where you got your coins from, where you send your coin to, why you send your coins from A to B, and what you spent your coins on... Think about it  

Not Really
I don't really enjoy the fact that anybody that knows my address can know the amount I'm having
Where it goes and where whence it's coming from
It's not limited to hiding from the government.

The person is confused and you are correct. This creates a huge security risk both for online and physical payments, it is significantly worse in physical payments. There is a face attached to the payment, and if they look up your change or related addresses then they will know your Bitcoin wealth. Obviously this presents a great opportunity for an attacker, and they'd have definite proof that you do have this amount -- so any kind of trickery with different passphrases, dummy wallets and whatever other in person excuses will not work against such a criminal. One-time payments would be very risky, regular payments at the same establishments would be a guaranteed ticket to a bad outcome eventually. The alternative is simply using wallets as single-purpose and dumping them afterwards, but that comes with extra work and is error-prone too.

Are you saying you reuse the same Bitcoin address for everything?

No, that is not what he is saying.

You can largely improve your privacy by using coin control, different addresses and even different wallets for different purposes.

Which requires a lot of knowledge, skill, and is very error-prone. A single mistake can undo a lot of the work that has been done. Mixers are better for this, and the user and philipma1957 are right about this. The primary good use cases is shielding from the recipients without the use of custodial platforms for wallet purposes. Mixers need a come back, users should have easy access to reputable mixers.

[Ambatman]

In some third-world countries, criminals bribe a branch worker in the bank to give them the personal information of people with large balances

I have seen such cases and they don't even have to be bribed
They are the criminals themselves

We saw something similar at where I work. Data breached obviously from an insider
And people fell for social engineering scam.
Believing Banks or reputable corporations would protect your data
Is like saying Traffic stops all accidents from happening.

Are you saying you reuse the same Bitcoin address for everything? You can largely improve your privacy by using coin control, different addresses and even different wallets for different purposes.

No, I was trying to explain to Logfile that privacy isn't just on the government
But to protect your funds from all prying eyes.

[dkbit98]

There is no mixer or private exchange that is registered with FinCEN. (Or whatever the European equivalent is.)

I could agree with you on mixers, but I am not sure about exchanges.
We saw many exchanges being registered in the past, maybe not with fincen, but with some other government agency.

Are you saying you reuse the same Bitcoin address for everything? You can largely improve your privacy by using coin control, different addresses and even different wallets for different purposes.

I would agree with this.
Good address management with labels is very important for bitcoin, and it's easy to do it with modern bitcoin wallets.

[Alpha Marine]

I don't really enjoy the fact that anybody that knows my address can know the amount I'm having

Ever heard of something called a bank? I am pretty certain no one in the public (except for Government and the banks) would know what your account number is if it wasn't revealed, how much is in your account, where you send your funds to and where you get your fund from... Ain't that right?
Why not use the bank then? Why go through all this headache?
[/quote]

If only it were that simple. In my country, people get scam calls, emails and text messages from people pretending to be the customer service of their banks. These scammers already have the account name, account number and bank of their potential victims, so they have had to get it one way or the other.
Aside from the fact that bank employees can sell personal information to scammers, there are other ways they can obtain it.

When unsuspecting people pay for goods through bank transfers, debit cards or cheques, the details of these people are in the system. All these are just a few ways that your account details can be gotten by scammers and hackers. So it's not just the government and the banks.
Not to talk about how careless with information the governments of some countries are.

[Satofan44]

I don't really enjoy the fact that anybody that knows my address can know the amount I'm having

Ever heard of something called a bank? I am pretty certain no one in the public (except for Government and the banks) would know what your account number is if it wasn't revealed, how much is in your account, where you send your funds to and where you get your fund from... Ain't that right?
Why not use the bank then? Why go through all this headache?

If only it were that simple. In my country, people get scam calls, emails and text messages from people pretending to be the customer service of their banks. These scammers already have the account name, account number and bank of their potential victims, so they have had to get it one way or the other.
Aside from the fact that bank employees can sell personal information to scammers, there are other ways they can obtain it.

When unsuspecting people pay for goods through bank transfers, debit cards or cheques, the details of these people are in the system. All these are just a few ways that your account details can be gotten by scammers and hackers. So it's not just the government and the banks.
Not to talk about how careless with information the governments of some countries are.

Apples and oranges, you guys are comparing things that are completely different. Comparing a leak of one private system, whether targeted or mass-leak, to a public by default system does not make any sense. Your bank account is private by default unless revealed with intent or through malicious means. Your Bitcoin address is public at all times by default, it just is not directly associated with you (by default, until changed through some means). When you pay something with the bank, there is no visibility of any "change". When you pay something with Bitcoin, you are connecting the address with your identity whether online or in person at least to the recipient, and you are revealing any change balance and every address that is linked to it.

It is unreasonable to expect the average user to understand UTXOs, do UTXO management, have knowledge of fingerprinting methods and be able to apply effective countermeasures. That is why banks and other services do not expose you publicly, and that is why mixers are one of the good solutions for Bitcoin users. An average user who is conducting UTXO management without the knowledge relating to fingerprinting methods is mostly wasting their time, it is going to be useless in almost all the cases except for the most basic adversary (average recipient) and even in that case it can fail due to a simple error  -- whoever claims otherwise does not know what they are talking about.

[logfiles]

Ever heard of something called a bank? I am pretty certain no one in the public (except for Government and the banks) would know what your account number is if it wasn't revealed, how much is in your account, where you send your funds to and where you get your fund from... Ain't that right?
Why not use the bank then? Why go through all this headache?

In some third-world countries, criminals bribe a branch worker in the bank to give them the personal information of people with large balances.

You can probably guess what happens next.

In the first-world countries they would just hack a website you paid at to get your card data, then use carding to try to cash out your balance.

So nobody is really safe.

Obviously banks, Government and other financial institutions are the worst forms of evil as far as user privacy is concerned. It is why were are probably here in the first place, looking for alternatives to avoid the unnecessary financial surveillance and control. I only tried to respond to Ambatman in a rhetorical way while trying to show him that what he is worried about is even nothing.

[BlackHatCoiner]

It is unreasonable to expect the average user to understand UTXOs, do UTXO management, have knowledge of fingerprinting methods and be able to apply effective countermeasures.

Isn't usage of a mixer also unreasonable for the same reasons? Someone who doesn't understand UTXOs, doesn't understand where they fall short in privacy either. In fact, I could bet that all mixer users know very well how Bitcoin works, and that's why they use them in the first place.

I also don't like the picture of directing a bitcoin newbie to forfeit custody without knowing the basics.

[Satofan44]

It is unreasonable to expect the average user to understand UTXOs, do UTXO management, have knowledge of fingerprinting methods and be able to apply effective countermeasures.

Isn't usage of a mixer also unreasonable for the same reasons? Someone who doesn't understand UTXOs, doesn't understand where they fall short in privacy either. In fact, I could bet that all mixer users know very well how Bitcoin works, and that's why they use them in the first place.

No? A simple mixer involves only two user actions (advanced ones will be different):
1) Receiving a transaction.
2) Sending a transaction.

That is it, those are 2 functionalities that you must know in order to use Bitcoin at all. Sure, you will probably make mistakes without having more knowledge about this topic but that is only an issue with advanced threat actors and government actors. An average recipient is unable to de-anonymize you if you do something stupid that is obvious to basic chain analysis, and that is all that matters in the context that we are speaking (a person that has advanced needs should educate themselves sufficiently to meet those needs). An average merchant is not going to poke around for hours on some random person hoping to discover that just that particular person has a lot of Bitcoin.

Obviously the more knowledge the better in both cases, but a basic mixer is always simpler than the alternative -- which has many edge cases and potential errors. Anyhow many wallets that are widely used do not even have coin control or UTXO freezing before spending, but they have well integrated multi-wallet management so mixing some of your money into a new wallet for spending is as easy as it gets these days.

I also don't like the picture of directing a bitcoin newbie to forfeit custody without knowing the basics.

In principle I agree, but in practice it does not apply. Most of the users that make up the group that you are referring to already are forfeiting custody, so this does not change anything for them. Lastly, those that have an issue with that can always go towards more advanced and decentralized methods. Actually, by having the ability to advertise and establish a reputation here again -- reputable and long-running mixers may emerge again more into the public spotlight. It would reduce the chance of people getting scammed overall, the same happened with casinos.

[Forsyth Jones]

It is unreasonable to expect the average user to understand UTXOs, do UTXO management, have knowledge of fingerprinting methods and be able to apply effective countermeasures.

Isn't usage of a mixer also unreasonable for the same reasons? Someone who doesn't understand UTXOs, doesn't understand where they fall short in privacy either. In fact, I could bet that all mixer users know very well how Bitcoin works, and that's why they use them in the first place.

I also don't like the picture of directing a bitcoin newbie to forfeit custody without knowing the basics.

One of the important points to consider before using a reputable mixer that's worth its salt, is to verify the validity of the garantee letter and it has some escrow, of course, there are several other factors as well, such as checking if it's not on any phishing sites.


Regarding the discussion about mixer restrictions, theymos hasn't given any indication that the rules will be relaxed.

Even though I'm in favor of allowing mixers here again, AFAIK nobody will go back to earning up to $300 p/ week promoting mixers here. In fact, I don't know why theymos hasn't locked this topic yet, since it's practically decided.

We know that mixers are a privacy tool, regardless of the risks (I myself have fallen into a rug pull), we also know that privacy is being criminalized around the world and those who seek privacy are being considered potential criminals. This is unfair, but unfortunately, the trend is to get worse.

My feeling is that people around the world will only start valuing privacy when they're practically in an orwellian scenario of 1984. Maybe the book is just a prediction of what's about to happen and the damned KYC is just the beginning of this tyranny disguised as security. In my country, the government is forcing people to confirm if we are real persons (confirming personal documents, facial recognition, or in some cases, credit cards) when accessing social medias like Facebook, Reddit, etc. the trend is that more sites and services will be required to use them.

Therefore, I warn you guys, if you are in a country where the culture of the people is in favor of draconian government measures in exchange for a false sense of security, you need to go to a freer country (the basics of flag theory).

The biggest culprits in what is happening are the average people masses of manipulation. In some third world countries, it's practically an open backyard for socialist/oppressive governments to practice their control schemes, rampant corruption for the king's friends. It's like a testing laboratory to later be implemented in more developed countries.

I assume that in 10 or 20 years, we can no longer call a society with this anti-privacy culture a society. That's already my 3 sats. 

[Zoomic]

One of the important points to consider before using a reputable mixer that's worth its salt, is to verify the validity of the garantee letter and it has some escrow, of course, there are several other factors as well, such as checking if it's not on any phishing sites.

When you call the mixer reputable, you have already eliminated some risks, unless you have a variant definition of the word "reputable".
AFAIK, a reputable mixer will not scam because they received 6 figures.

Regarding the discussion about mixer restrictions, theymos hasn't given any indication that the rules will be relaxed.

He gave such indications. In fact if not the inconsistency of the present government, theymos would have relaxed the ban.

Even though I'm in favor of allowing mixers here again, AFAIK nobody will go back to earning up to $300 p/ week promoting mixers here. In fact, I don't know why theymos hasn't locked this topic yet, since it's practically decided.

The main idea isn't to earn 300 p/w, besides since the exit of the mixers, we have been earning.
Theymos is not gonna lock the thread because he also watches the thread for any new developments. The ban of mixers was a forced decision, so it is probably not a permanent one if things will go well.

[bitmover]

It is unreasonable to expect the average user to understand UTXOs, do UTXO management, have knowledge of fingerprinting methods and be able to apply effective countermeasures.

Isn't usage of a mixer also unreasonable for the same reasons? Someone who doesn't understand UTXOs, doesn't understand where they fall short in privacy either. In fact, I could bet that all mixer users know very well how Bitcoin works, and that's why they use them in the first place.

I also don't like the picture of directing a bitcoin newbie to forfeit custody without knowing the basics.

One of the important points to consider before using a reputable mixer that's worth its salt, is to verify the validity of the garantee letter and it has some escrow, of course, there are several other factors as well, such as checking if it's not on any phishing sites.


Regarding the discussion about mixer restrictions, theymos hasn't given any indication that the rules will be relaxed.

Even though I'm in favor of allowing mixers here again, AFAIK nobody will go back to earning up to $300 p/ week promoting mixers here. In fact, I don't know why theymos hasn't locked this topic yet, since it's practically decided.

We know that mixers are a privacy tool, regardless of the risks (I myself have fallen into a rug pull), we also know that privacy is being criminalized around the world and those who seek privacy are being considered potential criminals. This is unfair, but unfortunately, the trend is to get worse.

My feeling is that people around the world will only start valuing privacy when they're practically in an orwellian scenario of 1984. Maybe the book is just a prediction of what's about to happen and the damned KYC is just the beginning of this tyranny disguised as security. In my country, the government is forcing people to confirm if we are real persons (confirming personal documents, facial recognition, or in some cases, credit cards) when accessing social medias like Facebook, Reddit, etc. the trend is that more sites and services will be required to use them.

Therefore, I warn you guys, if you are in a country where the culture of the people is in favor of draconian government measures in exchange for a false sense of security, you need to go to a freer country (the basics of flag theory).

The biggest culprits in what is happening are the average people masses of manipulation. In some third world countries, it's practically an open backyard for socialist/oppressive governments to practice their control schemes, rampant corruption for the king's friends. It's like a testing laboratory to later be implemented in more developed countries.

I assume that in 10 or 20 years, we can no longer call a society with this anti-privacy culture a society. That's already my 3 sats. 

Although you are right and privacy is being criminalized , there are still some good advances in privacy.

For example, before bitcoin we could not send money out of our country without the informing the government (very strict capital control in Brazil). Now we can, and it is extremely easy to do so, using bitcoin or USDT.

Basically anyone can buy  bitcoin (CEX, p2p, DEX, whatever) and send to anyone anywhere in the world, free of charge or taxes (for now), and without informing or asking permission for anyone.

Bitcoin is the present and the future. They can't stop it.

[Forsyth Jones]

The main idea isn't to earn 300 p/w, besides since the exit of the mixers, we have been earning.
Theymos is not gonna lock the thread because he also watches the thread for any new developments. The ban of mixers was a forced decision, so it is probably not a permanent one if things will go well.

Yes, I know, I'm not criticizing that. I think the payment is defined by the companies together with the managers, a valid voluntary relationship.

I think we won't have a president who is more pro-crypto like Trump (despite his personal motivations). The guy is more motivated by other things and has blood in his eyes attacking other dictatorial countries and arresting dictators like Maduro. So the next years of his term will be more focused on that. So when his term ends, it's very likely that attacks on privacy and the imposition of more restrictions will resume (pray it's not some old fool democrat like Biden who likes to mess with Bitcoin and privacy).

While the Trump administration is massively better than the Biden administration regarding persecution of privacy-protecting services, this seems partly to be due to general chaos at the agencies and a deprioritization of this kind of thing, rather than a real pro-freedom ideology; you can see in e.g. the Samourai and Paxful cases that they will go after privacy-protecting services when convenient. Moreover, right now is the best environment that we're ever going to get: I think that Trump may get progressively worse on these issues as he and his subordinates get annoyed by specific cases of money laundering, and after Trump, whether Democrat or Republican, it's almost certainly going to get a lot worse than now.

I am thinking that I will change the rules to allow:
 - Unpaid linking directly to mixers in posts, as long as the mixers aren't also "illegal darknet sites" (which is a term I need to more exactly define).
 - Easing the enforcement of indirection. For example, in the past we would not allow sig ads which point to an article talking about and linking to a mixer. But it's probably OK now if this kind of thing is allowed.

I haven't decided yet on the exact language of those rule changes, though, so the existing rules stand for now.

I didn't get the point theymos made above. Just because a site is on the dark web doesn't necessarily mean it's illegal, there are several services that have onion mirrors, but as he said, it's a term that needs to be defined more precisely.

Although you are right and privacy is being criminalized , there are still some good advances in privacy.

For example, before bitcoin we could not send money out of our country without the informing the government (very strict capital control in Brazil). Now we can, and it is extremely easy to do so, using bitcoin or USDT.

Basically anyone can buy  bitcoin (CEX, p2p, DEX, whatever) and send to anyone anywhere in the world, free of charge or taxes (for now), and without informing or asking permission for anyone.

Bitcoin is the present and the future. They can't stop it.

They're already starting to limit fiat withdrawals in brazil, the government is forcing people to use only digital payments (which are more easily tracked by the government), while Trump prohibited the development of a dollar CBDC (I see there are some people here who hate Trump, they don't know what it's like to have a truly evil president like lula), while in brazil, we already have PIX which is enough for the tax authority (equivalent to an IRS) to monitor and cross-check citizens' data.