Scammer lead developer resigns from honeypot Wasabi Wallet

[SquirrelJulietGarden]

In terms of whatever Peter Todd thinks of Wasabi, I tend not to care what one person's opinion is, regardless of who that person is. Gavin Andresen was a reputable contributor to bitcoin, and people blindly listening to his opinion has caused untold damage in this space. The opinion of one person is irrelevant, especially when that opinion can be bought. I care about the facts.

Bitcoin is a decentralized project and when it has been here for more years, it has been becoming more and more decentralized.

As part of Bitcoin history, we can not deny some facts that in early months, it is not a decentralized project with so much centralization on Satoshi Nakamoto, Gavin Andresen, sirius and some early programmers.

Things are very different with Bitcoin protocol to allow developers to join, and big upgrade must be decentralized voted by many nodes. A single developer nowadays can not change the Bitcoin protocol.

The power of community is decentralization so if one person, even had big contributions in the past, now start to mislead the project, will not be support by majority of Bitcoin community.

[1714742930]

1714742930

[1714742930]

1714742930

[1714742930]

1714742930

[ABCbits]

Now on topic, I wonder if samurai and watnotsabi use the same technology?

They use different technology. Samourai uses Whirlpool/ZeroLink[1] while Wasabi use WabiSabi[2].

What exactly is needed to run such a service? honestly if both wallets are completely open source, then there is no need to point fingers and have such dramas, one could simply fork the wallet and start a new service, a better one.

At bare minimum, a server and ability to follow guide about setting either coinjoin software. But gaining people's trust and liquidity to perform CoinJoin isn't simple.

[1] https://docs.samourai.io/en/wallet/features/whirlpool
[2] https://github.com/zkSNACKs/WabiSabi

[n0nce]

What exactly is needed to run such a service? honestly if both wallets are completely open source, then there is no need to point fingers and have such dramas, one could simply fork the wallet and start a new service, a better one.

At bare minimum, a server and ability to follow guide about setting either coinjoin software. But gaining people's trust and liquidity to perform CoinJoin isn't simple.

In any of these 2 cases though, you'll still be running a centralized service. As a coordinator, authorities will be able to pressure you into shutting down, implementing privacy-breaking changes and helping them deanonymizing users through blockchain analysis. Maybe they'll force you to partner with a blockchain analysis firm, even. Does some of this sound familiar?

One solution would be to switch to decentralized approaches, such as JoinMarket.

[ABCbits]

What exactly is needed to run such a service? honestly if both wallets are completely open source, then there is no need to point fingers and have such dramas, one could simply fork the wallet and start a new service, a better one.

At bare minimum, a server and ability to follow guide about setting either coinjoin software. But gaining people's trust and liquidity to perform CoinJoin isn't simple.

In any of these 2 cases though, you'll still be running a centralized service. As a coordinator, authorities will be able to pressure you into shutting down, implementing privacy-breaking changes and helping them deanonymizing users through blockchain analysis. Maybe they'll force you to partner with a blockchain analysis firm, even. Does some of this sound familiar?

That's true, although authority would have harder time pressure anonymous person/group.

One solution would be to switch to decentralized approaches, such as JoinMarket.

That's valid solution, although it remain less popular since it require you to run full node[1] is AFAIK there's still no user-friendly interface which can rival Wasabi or Samourai wallet.

[1] https://github.com/JoinMarket-Org/joinmarket-clientserver/blob/master/docs/JOINMARKET-QT-GUIDE.md

[apogio]

One solution would be to switch to decentralized approaches, such as JoinMarket.

After trying literally every service for this purpose (except the wasabi ones), I can safely agree that JoinMarket is my favorite one. I use others too, of course, but JoinMarket is the most decentralised one.

AFAIK there's still no user-friendly interface which can rival Wasabi or Samourai wallet.

It comes with a fancy UI: Jam.

Here is the installation guide for multiple node implementations: https://jamdocs.org/software/installation/

If you think about it from a technical perspective, JoinMarket needs a backend implementation which is here: https://github.com/JoinMarket-Org/joinmarket-clientserver and a UI implementation which is here: https://github.com/joinmarket-webui/jam

Yes, it's not the easiest approach. Yes, it requires manual work. But it is worth it.

[ABCbits]

AFAIK there's still no user-friendly interface which can rival Wasabi or Samourai wallet.

It comes with a fancy UI: Jam.

Here is the installation guide for multiple node implementations: https://jamdocs.org/software/installation/

If you think about it from a technical perspective, JoinMarket needs a backend implementation which is here: https://github.com/JoinMarket-Org/joinmarket-clientserver and a UI implementation which is here: https://github.com/joinmarket-webui/jam

Yes, it's not the easiest approach. Yes, it requires manual work. But it is worth it.

That project use different GitHub account, so no wonder i didn't know about it. While the UI application seems to be user-friendly, the installation process[1] would filter many Bitcoiner.

[1] https://jamdocs.org/software/installation/

[apogio]

That project use different GitHub account, so no wonder i didn't know about it. While the UI application seems to be user-friendly, the installation process[1] would filter many Bitcoiner.

[1] https://jamdocs.org/software/installation/

Certainly. There is also a very good guide for installing both of these in Raspibolt's webpage:

1. https://raspibolt.org/guide/bonus/bitcoin/joinmarket.html
2. https://raspibolt.org/guide/bonus/bitcoin/Jam.html

I plan to install it this weekend! I will let you know.

[BlackHatCoiner]

After trying literally every service for this purpose (except the wasabi ones), I can safely agree that JoinMarket is my favorite one. I use others too, of course, but JoinMarket is the most decentralised one.

It is the most decentralized, but honestly, I prefer Whirlpool over Joinmarket. In the former, you get infinite remixes for free. In the latter, not only don't you get free remixes, but you pay for every maker's input. It has also presented some issues with the fee selection, like this one for instance.

If you think about it from a technical perspective, JoinMarket needs a backend implementation which is here: https://github.com/JoinMarket-Org/joinmarket-clientserver and a UI implementation which is here: https://github.com/joinmarket-webui/jam

JoinMarket does come with a UI, Joinmarket-Qt. Also, note that Jam is unofficial.

[apogio]

It is the most decentralized, but honestly, I prefer Whirlpool over Joinmarket. In the former, you get infinite remixes for free. In the latter, not only don't you get free remixes, but you pay for every maker's input. It has also presented some issues with the fee selection, like this one for instance.

Correct. I agree but it has worked perfectly for me this far. I guess you pay these issues to gain in decentralisation.

[NotATether]

AFAIK there's still no user-friendly interface which can rival Wasabi or Samourai wallet.

It comes with a fancy UI: Jam.

Here is the installation guide for multiple node implementations: https://jamdocs.org/software/installation/

If you think about it from a technical perspective, JoinMarket needs a backend implementation which is here: https://github.com/JoinMarket-Org/joinmarket-clientserver and a UI implementation which is here: https://github.com/joinmarket-webui/jam

Yes, it's not the easiest approach. Yes, it requires manual work. But it is worth it.

That project use different GitHub account, so no wonder i didn't know about it. While the UI application seems to be user-friendly, the installation process[1] would filter many Bitcoiner.

[1] https://jamdocs.org/software/installation/

Why on earth would you use a web interface and expose your HTTP port in order to do a coinjoin?

Not only does it come with the usual risks of bots infiltrating your network with malicious packets and spam, but it also allows them to potentially use a vulnerability to steal crypto located inside the JoinMarket wallet.

There is nothing wrong with the Qt interface of JoinMarket.

[ABCbits]

That project use different GitHub account, so no wonder i didn't know about it. While the UI application seems to be user-friendly, the installation process[1] would filter many Bitcoiner.

[1] https://jamdocs.org/software/installation/

Why on earth would you use a web interface and expose your HTTP port in order to do a coinjoin?

Not only does it come with the usual risks of bots infiltrating your network with malicious packets and spam, but it also allows them to potentially use a vulnerability to steal crypto located inside the JoinMarket wallet.

That's good point. While i don't play to try Jam for now, it could prevented by using firewall with advance rule.

There is nothing wrong with the Qt interface of JoinMarket.

It depends on what we count as wrong. Although it can't denied the UI doesn't look as good as many modern application or website.

[n0nce]

Why on earth would you use a web interface and expose your HTTP port in order to do a coinjoin?

That's good point. While i don't play to try Jam for now, it could prevented by using firewall with advance rule.

In fact, any decent firewall should block all ports by default. On my own full node, everything is only accessible locally from the machine itself, by default.

If you open a port on the local firewall, it becomes available on your LAN, but it's still going to be safe from anyone not on this network. Only by opening a port on the device's firewall and port-forwarding it on your router, it would actually be 'exposed'.

Web GUIs allow you to e.g. run JoinMarket on a headless server in your LAN and access it from your various PCs and laptops, and they do tend to look more modern than something built on QT. Although personally, as a long-term Bitcoin-Qt user, I prefer the JoinMarket-Qt interface.

[LoyceV]

Another reason why it would be a great acquisition for them is that it would give them a huge competitive advantage over other blockchain analysis firms. They'd be the only ones able to provide data on Wasabi CoinJoin'ed transactions.

Wouldn't it be more likely for all privacy minded users to abandon Wasabi entirely? Even if the current bad reputation isn't enough, that will end the moment it's bought by a blockchain analysis company.

[n0nce]

Another reason why it would be a great acquisition for them is that it would give them a huge competitive advantage over other blockchain analysis firms. They'd be the only ones able to provide data on Wasabi CoinJoin'ed transactions.

Wouldn't it be more likely for all privacy minded users to abandon Wasabi entirely? Even if the current bad reputation isn't enough, that will end the moment it's bought by a blockchain analysis company.

I like to think that everyone who really understands privacy has already left Wasabi; being acquired by a blockchain analysis firm may not matter all that much to current users. zkSNACKs would also just continue to claim users are fully private due to their open-source client code and zero-knowledge components of the system, just like they did when the 'Blacklisting Update' came out.

Also consider how many companies have some (sometimes shady) parent company that simply nobody knows about; this could maybe be done in a low-key way that doesn't pull too much attention.

[NotATether]

Another reason why it would be a great acquisition for them is that it would give them a huge competitive advantage over other blockchain analysis firms. They'd be the only ones able to provide data on Wasabi CoinJoin'ed transactions.

Wouldn't it be more likely for all privacy minded users to abandon Wasabi entirely? Even if the current bad reputation isn't enough, that will end the moment it's bought by a blockchain analysis company.

Bought by a blockchain analysis company?

Besides self-sabotage, why would one of them try to buy out Wasabi Wallet (and zksnacks). Would that not be counter-intuitive since they would lose money buying something to destroy?

I've always imagined if a blockchain analysis company wanted to create a wallet, they'd load it full of spyware and other kinds of tracking. Like Coinbase.

EDIT: silly me, I completely missed the news that Wasabi wallet are trying to sell out (literally this time).

[kayirigi]

Another reason why it would be a great acquisition for them is that it would give them a huge competitive advantage over other blockchain analysis firms. They'd be the only ones able to provide data on Wasabi CoinJoin'ed transactions.

Wouldn't it be more likely for all privacy minded users to abandon Wasabi entirely? Even if the current bad reputation isn't enough, that will end the moment it's bought by a blockchain analysis company.

All privacy minded users already abandon Wasabi. Only used by newbies who don't know better or who are tricked by scammers adverts. And Wasabi already might have been bought by BC analysis company! They will never admit it.

[Medusah]

Besides self-sabotage, why would one of them try to buy out Wasabi Wallet (and zksnacks). Would that not be counter-intuitive since they would lose money buying something to destroy?

It makes as sense as if a privacy proclaiming service hired a blockchain surveillance firm to spy on their clients.  Oh wait!

[pooya87]

Wouldn't it be more likely for all privacy minded users to abandon Wasabi entirely? Even if the current bad reputation isn't enough, that will end the moment it's bought by a blockchain analysis company.

The "privacy minded users" are not their target. Instead their target is the majority who don't really understand how to improve their privacy and are too lazy to do any research so they end up in a honeypot like Wasabi wallet.
That's more than enough for a blockchain analysis company to get ahead in the competition and make a ton of money selling its services to bitcoin businesses who are forced by the authorities to subscribe to such malicious services.

In my opinion the danger Wasabi poses which needs to be emphasized is not to its own users, it is to other privacy oriented projects and also to privacy in general.

Think of this scenario: a user who mixes their coin using anything but Wasabi (like centralized mixers, other CoinJoin implementations, etc.) has their transaction rejected and their account restricted by a centralized service they're using (like a CEX). But users who use Wasabi don't face the same problem since the blockchain analysis company knows their coins origin and has the "link" which they provide authorities.
They start complaining on the internet and start being advised to use the Wasabi (they honeypot) because they didn't have their coins seized when using Wasabi.

Before you know it the number of users of real privacy improving tools fall, their volume falls too making CoinJoin and mixing harder while making banning them a lot easier and less costly for centralized services making those services comply more willingly.

[Dont Trust Verify]

Wouldn't it be more likely for all privacy minded users to abandon Wasabi entirely? Even if the current bad reputation isn't enough, that will end the moment it's bought by a blockchain analysis company.

The "privacy minded users" are not their target. Instead their target is the majority who don't really understand how to improve their privacy and are too lazy to do any research so they end up in a honeypot like Wasabi wallet.
That's more than enough for a blockchain analysis company to get ahead in the competition and make a ton of money selling its services to bitcoin businesses who are forced by the authorities to subscribe to such malicious services.

In my opinion the danger Wasabi poses which needs to be emphasized is not to its own users, it is to other privacy oriented projects and also to privacy in general.

Think of this scenario: a user who mixes their coin using anything but Wasabi (like centralized mixers, other CoinJoin implementations, etc.) has their transaction rejected and their account restricted by a centralized service they're using (like a CEX). But users who use Wasabi don't face the same problem since the blockchain analysis company knows their coins origin and has the "link" which they provide authorities.
They start complaining on the internet and start being advised to use the Wasabi (they honeypot) because they didn't have their coins seized when using Wasabi.

Before you know it the number of users of real privacy improving tools fall, their volume falls too making CoinJoin and mixing harder while making banning them a lot easier and less costly for centralized services making those services comply more willingly.

A mixed output can’t be linked to its origin. That’s why the protocol Wasabi was originally based on is called ZeroLink. Chain analysis companies wouldn’t know anything besides what’s already publicly visible on the blockchain. The coordinator is blind to which outputs were funded by which inputs. Tor and block filters also ensure additional privacy from the coordinator which is in contrast to Whirlpool, where by default you’re connecting over your clear IP and revealing your XPUBs. It’s also different than Jambler based mixers, which many in this forum seem so fond of. Jambler, which also blacklists tainted coins, is custodial and knows the direct link between deposits and withdrawals.

[n0nce]

Another reason why it would be a great acquisition for them is that it would give them a huge competitive advantage over other blockchain analysis firms. They'd be the only ones able to provide data on Wasabi CoinJoin'ed transactions.

Wouldn't it be more likely for all privacy minded users to abandon Wasabi entirely? Even if the current bad reputation isn't enough, that will end the moment it's bought by a blockchain analysis company.

Bought by a blockchain analysis company?
Besides self-sabotage, why would one of them try to buy out Wasabi Wallet (and zksnacks). Would that not be counter-intuitive since they would lose money buying something to destroy?

I highly doubt that such a move would destroy the wallet; zkSNACKs already successfully convinced their remaining user base that the current collaboration with blockchain analysis is not a privacy issue, so I think they'll market it successfully, again.