A possible problem with one reputable mixer service

[examplens]

It's about the Unijoin mixer service.
Like most mixers, they moved their ANN to the Altt forum. One user appeared who claimed to have lost 15+ Bitcoins that he sent to that service.
From the way the problem is presented, it seems as if it is a hack and that the public key was changed during the mixing session.

This thread is not an accusation, just a distraction because the user did not provide clear evidence (under the pretext of protecting his privacy). An additional problem is that Unijoin does not have its official representatives on that forum, so we still do not have any public explanation from their side.

Here is his brief explanation

My original post:

Key points:
I did not leave the correct URL [removed due to mixer ban rule]
A series of successful mixes were carried out
At some point they changed their public key
There were 2 successful mixes with a fake public key
In the third mix with a fake key they simply stole my btc and deleted the orderId
And again I did not leave the correct URL, all this happened during the same browser session
After the money was not returned I created a test mix where their key was already correct.

For those who are interested in more https://www.altcoinstalks.com/index.php?topic=317783

Interestingly, the same user donated 10.6ETH to the forum, I guess to demonstrate that he has available money. This raises the suspicion that it may have been thought up by a third side like competitors or the FED for example.

[1714573821]

1714573821

[1714573821]

1714573821

[1714573821]

1714573821

[Yamane_Keto]

Interestingly, the same user donated 10.6ETH to the forum, I guess to demonstrate that he has available money. This raises the suspicion that it may have been thought up by a third side like competitors or the FED for example.

What is confusing in all of this story is the issue of donation. No one pays $30,000 to harm Unijoin's reputation usin a trolling account without details or even giving more information. It is too much, and in a better way, this story can be avoided.
The amount of loss is not known yet and uniJOIN has been paying here for a long time, which gives them trust and less possibility of scam.

It seems that the owner of that account is linked to illegal or that the story needs more details from @jessuni or unijoin.

[examplens]

What is confusing in all of this story is the issue of donation. No one pays $30,000 to harm Unijoin's reputation usin a trolling account without details or even giving more information. It is too much, and in a better way, this story can be avoided.

It is NOT an impossible scenario. Some mixers have spent much more money on advertising, and this amount, if you put it together with marketing costs, does not sound so strange.
I would certainly like to hear an official answer from Unijoin representatives.

[bitmover]

One point that is important  is the lack of representatives in altcoinstalks and in bitcointalk  (as mixers are banned here)...

Certainly we are missing this important channel to contact mixers representatives.

[un_rank]

The amount of loss is not known yet and uniJOIN has been paying here for a long time, which gives them trust and less possibility of scam.

Many a scam project have spent way more on advertising, precisely to get that illusion of trust and reliability, attracting more victims.
Do not use this as a metric of what project has a higher possibility of scam.

That being said we can only speculate some more as is being done over at the other forum, but without any direct communication from Unijoin, it's just speculations.

- Jay -

[Latonya86Dodson]

It's about the Unijoin mixer service.
Like most mixers, they moved their ANN to the Altt forum. One user appeared who claimed to have lost 15+ Bitcoins that he sent to that service.
From the way the problem is presented, it seems as if it is a hack and that the public key was changed during the mixing session. BeBallPlayers

This thread is not an accusation, just a distraction because the user did not provide clear evidence (under the pretext of protecting his privacy). An additional problem is that Unijoin does not have its official representatives on that forum, so we still do not have any public explanation from their side.

Here is his brief explanation

My original post:

Key points:
I did not leave the correct URL [removed due to mixer ban rule]
A series of successful mixes were carried out
At some point they changed their public key
There were 2 successful mixes with a fake public key
In the third mix with a fake key they simply stole my btc and deleted the orderId
And again I did not leave the correct URL, all this happened during the same browser session
After the money was not returned I created a test mix where their key was already correct.

For those who are interested in more https://www.altcoinstalks.com/index.php?topic=317783

Interestingly, the same user donated 10.6ETH to the forum, I guess to demonstrate that he has available money. This raises the suspicion that it may have been thought up by a third side like competitors or the FED for example.

I understand that you are curious about the Unijoin mixer service and the claim of one user who said he lost 15+ Bitcoins using it. This is a serious allegation that could damage the reputation and trust of the service, if true.

Based on the information you provided, it is hard to verify the validity of the user’s claim, as he did not provide any clear evidence or details, such as the transaction IDs, the order IDs, the screenshots, or the timestamps. He also said he did not leave the correct URL, which could mean he used a phishing site or a fake service that mimicked the Unijoin mixer.

According to the web search results from my internal tool, Unijoin is a Bitcoin mixer that uses CoinJoin technology to enhance the privacy and anonymity of its users. It also claims to have a no-logs policy and a Tor browser integration. It has some positive reviews and ratings from other users and websites.

However, it is possible that the service could have some technical issues, security breaches, or malicious actors that could compromise its functionality and reliability. It is also possible that the user who made the claim could have some ulterior motives, such as spreading false information, creating confusion, or promoting other services.

Therefore, the best way to find out the truth is to contact the Unijoin support team directly and ask them for an explanation or a resolution. You can find their contact information on their website. You can also check their official social media accounts or blog posts for any updates or announcements.

I hope this answer helps you understand the situation better.

[examplens]

I understand that you are curious about the Unijoin mixer service and the claim of one user who said he lost 15+ Bitcoins using it. This is a serious allegation that could damage the reputation and trust of the service, if true.

Based on the information you provided, it is hard to verify the validity of the user’s claim, as he did not provide any clear evidence or details, such as the transaction IDs, the order IDs, the screenshots, or the timestamps. He also said he did not leave the correct URL, which could mean he used a phishing site or a fake service that mimicked the Unijoin mixer.

According to the web search results from my internal tool, Unijoin is a Bitcoin mixer that uses CoinJoin technology to enhance the privacy and anonymity of its users. It also claims to have a no-logs policy and a Tor browser integration. It has some positive reviews and ratings from other users and websites.

However, it is possible that the service could have some technical issues, security breaches, or malicious actors that could compromise its functionality and reliability. It is also possible that the user who made the claim could have some ulterior motives, such as spreading false information, creating confusion, or promoting other services.

Therefore, the best way to find out the truth is to contact the Unijoin support team directly and ask them for an explanation or a resolution. You can find their contact information on their website. You can also check their official social media accounts or blog posts for any updates or announcements.

I hope this answer helps you understand the situation better.

Honestly, you sound like a bot or an AI-generated answer. You roughly just rephrased what I wrote above, so I'm not sure about the point of your answer.

Of course, somehow we got a response from Unijoin about this case:

Recently, we learned of a claim indicating that a user was defrauded by UniJoin. However, a closer look reveals that the shared letter of guarantee is missing UniJoin's public key, which is a crucial element and is accessible to the public on our platform. This indicates that no order was ever placed through UniJoin.

When presented with an incorrect letter of guarantee, there are multiple scenarios that could have occurred. It's not uncommon for us to receive requests from individuals who upload letters of guarantee without any prior deposits for an attend to receive BTC refunds. A second possible scenario is where consumers might have unintentionally accessed a phishing website and sent Bitcoin to a fraudulent website.

We find such phishing websites very frequently and are constantly working to shut each and every one of them down. Our community is also actively fighting this problem, and over the past six months, Bitcointalk users have repeatedly united their efforts to stop fraudulent activities in telegrams, websites and others (we are talking about dozens of phishing attempts). Lastly we do not exclude the possible scenario in that another company will make up these allegations in order to harm our name.

We also do not refer to our crystal clear reputation, and the fact that our platform is used by thousands of people every month, since the reputation component is not relevant to this issue. As for the technical part, It's difficult for us to carry out a comprehensive investigation in the absence of additional proof. It's important to remember, though, that the shared letter of guarantee does not contain our public key, which verifies that UniJoin was not used to process the order.

We sincerely thank you for your attention to this matter and reassure you that maintaining the integrity of our platform always remains our top priority.

Source

[KingsDen]

Honestly, you sound like a bot or an AI-generated answer. You roughly just rephrased what I wrote above, so I'm not sure about the point of your answer.

Obviously, this is an AI generated text

According to the web search results from my internal tool, Unijoin is a Bitcoin mixer that uses CoinJoin technology to enhance the privacy and anonymity of its users. It also claims to have a no-logs policy and a Tor browser integration. It has some positive reviews and ratings from other users and websites.

I have read the response by Unijoin rep. The possibility of phishing scam is there. But if I were to mix coins as high as 15BTC, I would be careful of phishing. Possibly I will just click from the signature in BTT Altcoinstalks. I knew that the absence of mixers here will give room for different kinds of scams.
Meanwhile the complainant donated 10+ Ethereum to the other forum. This will mean alot if investigated correctly.

[Don Pedro Dinero]

Many a scam project have spent way more on advertising, precisely to get that illusion of trust and reliability, attracting more victims.
Do not use this as a metric of what project has a higher possibility of scam.

That being said we can only speculate some more as is being done over at the other forum, but without any direct communication from Unijoin, it's just speculations.

- Jay -

I've known about scams for a long time, fortunately without ever being scammed myself but if the story told by the protagonist were true it would be the first scam I know of that scams a single person for the amount and then continues running business as usual in an honest way with the rest of the customers. The protagonist there even talked about exit scam, without apparently knowing what it means:

An exit scam is a confidence trick where an established business stops shipping orders while receiving payment for new orders.

So for a business to rip off a single person and then continue to be honest with the rest and continue running the business as usual, although not impossible, I think is quite unlikely and sounds quite weird.

[DaveF]

So for a business to rip off a single person and then continue to be honest with the rest and continue running the business as usual, although not impossible, I think is quite unlikely and sounds quite weird.

Agreed, BUT it could be (not saying it is or is not) a case of selective scamming.
We have seen that happen where you take care of 499 people perfectly and that last 1 out of the 500 you scam.
It's 2 out of 1000 which can get you some decent funds because most of us will blame the user at that point since so many people are happy.....

But, if a user is SO interested in protecting their privacy that they will not show anyone proof of what happened, it's tough to make that call since nobody else can verify.

-Dave

[un_rank]

I've known about scams for a long time, fortunately without ever being scammed myself but if the story told by the protagonist were true it would be the first scam I know of that scams a single person for the amount and then continues running business as usual in an honest way with the rest of the customers.

There is a slight possibility that we may not be privy to any other scam accusation against the service that may have been posted anywhere else on the internet or did not make it to the internet at all. Sets of isolated cases can go unoticed, but if it becomes more frequent there surely would be more cases here on the forum.

So for a business to rip off a single person and then continue to be honest with the rest and continue running the business as usual, although not impossible, I think is quite unlikely and sounds quite weird.

An answer from them could have cleared everything up, but that is not likely to happen due to the lack of direct presence here.

- Jay -

[dkbit98]

I heard about this and I think there is a lot of suspicious information coming from this guy who allegedly lost a lot of bitcoins using this sevice.
He never provided a single proof for his claims, he is asking people to trust his words and he spent a lot of money to bring attention to his case.
In bitcointalk forum we have Scam Accusation section and rules say that accuser needs to provide some evidence for his claims if he wants to receive support from others.

[Yamane_Keto]

There is another explanation, which is that it may be part of money laundering by hackers. The date the story was published and the failure to post sufficient details or even the amount of "scammed coins" (he said it may help identify the identity of the transaction) may indicate this. The story was posted on February 14, 2024. Two days later, we heard about the FixedFloat hack.

The two stories may not be related, but I don't think it's an attempt to distort reputation. Paying $30,000 will require a better story.

[NotATether]

I heard about this and I think there is a lot of suspicious information coming from this guy who allegedly lost a lot of bitcoins using this sevice.
He never provided a single proof for his claims, he is asking people to trust his words and he spent a lot of money to bring attention to his case.
In bitcointalk forum we have Scam Accusation section and rules say that accuser needs to provide some evidence for his claims if he wants to receive support from others.

Why does this user immediately go and pay 10.6 ETH to the forum after he lost his coins in the mixer?

Am I missing something here?

Nobody in their right mind would through even more money down the drain after they lose a significant sum, except I guess fools who are the type that fall for scammers, but it's already been established that a fool and his money are easily parted, and that is not what's happening here.

[Don Pedro Dinero]

Agreed, BUT it could be (not saying it is or is not) a case of selective scamming.
We have seen that happen where you take care of 499 people perfectly and that last 1 out of the 500 you scam.
It's 2 out of 1000 which can get you some decent funds because most of us will blame the user at that point since so many people are happy.....

But, if a user is SO interested in protecting their privacy that they will not show anyone proof of what happened, it's tough to make that call since nobody else can verify.

I also agree with you, as I didn't say it was impossible, which I find unlikely and not at all common.

Why does this user immediately go and pay 10.6 ETH to the forum after he lost his coins in the mixer?

Am I missing something here?

Nobody in their right mind would through even more money down the drain after they lose a significant sum, except I guess fools who are the type that fall for scammers, but it's already been established that a fool and his money are easily parted, and that is not what's happening here.

What you are missing is there are people who have so much money that $20,000 for them is like $20 for you. It is a tiny percentage of the population, but there are some. That might be the case if the character was genuine and the story was true, but if not I'd be inclined to say it's just some competitor trying to throw shit on unijoin and spending whatever money it takes to do so, although I find this more unlikely.

[examplens]

Why does this user immediately go and pay 10.6 ETH to the forum after he lost his coins in the mixer?

Not immediately, but after other users expressed doubts about the accuracy of his claims. I guess he just wanted to prove that they had a large number of cryptocurrencies. It certainly helped draw attention to himself and his "case".

Am I missing something here?

Nobody in their right mind would through even more money down the drain after they lose a significant sum, except I guess fools who are the type that fall for scammers, but it's already been established that a fool and his money are easily parted, and that is not what's happening here.

Here is something that was recognized as illogical in his scam accusation:

This is part of a chat he had with Unijoin support, where he declares that he is not looking for a return of 15+ Bitcoins.

You, 3 days ago
No. Always had the correct web address. I repeat that I did not leave your web address, and there were several successful mixes before. Also, there are no infections or access to my machine, otherwise the rest of my funds would be lost. Im not asking you to return the money, but would you like to at least try to understand what happened. In fact, the user created an order on your mixer, the mixers web address was correct, not phishing, your system generated a letter of guarantee, then the money did not arrive to the user, and the user saw that the letter generated by your mixer contained a different key.

Later he gave an explanation why he said he was giving up the refund

I wrote that I did not demand a refund only after they refused to do anything. I thought it would motivate them to do something to solve the problem. Obviously this was actually a failed attempt. Also this phrase caused a wave of skepticism on the forum so I showed the seriousness of the situation by making a donation to the official forum wallet.

Previously, on two occasions, he reported different amounts for which he was scammed. Where the difference is only 5 BTC



He explained this as

I edited the mix amount because it's quite large and I think it's easy to track. It's not even 10 or 15 btc.

Now think that after all he donated 10.6 Ethereum to the forum.

Of course, it does not help that Unijoin does not have its official representative (communication goes through the manager), so we are deprived of more details from that side and answers to some other questions.

[PX-Z]

It looks like that user won't give any additional proof (screenshots, wallet address, txid, etc.) anytime soon as long as Unijoin will not directly respond to him or on that thread. Well, since the user is open to chat in the live support, Unijoin won't create an account there just to respond "baseless" accusation. That accusation will remain accusation thread attempting to tarnish the website's reputation but it will stay just that.
Idk the reason of him donating such amount, if it's only for attention, then he really succeed to that.

[Savastan0]

It looks like that user won't give any additional proof (screenshots, wallet address, txid, etc.) anytime soon as long as Unijoin will not directly respond to him or on that thread. Well, since the user is open to chat in the live support, Unijoin won't create an account there just to respond "baseless" accusation. That accusation will remain accusation thread attempting to tarnish the website's reputation but it will stay just that.
Idk the reason of him donating such amount, if it's only for attention, then he really succeed for to that.

 It seems the accusation will remain as is, without proof, possibly aimed at harming the website's reputation. And as for the motive behind the large donation, if it's just for attention, then they've certainly achieved that goal.

[dkbit98]

Why does this user immediately go and pay 10.6 ETH to the forum after he lost his coins in the mixer?

To get a monarch rank in forum and get support from admins for his accusation case
My speculation was that he could be coming from some competition mixer, but it's hard to know the truth when you don't have any proof.
If he really owns a lot of Bitcoins than adding burning a little more was not such a big deal for him.
And if really really lost over 15 BTC like he said than he acted very causal about it.

[icopress]

Why does this user immediately go and pay 10.6 ETH to the forum after he lost his coins in the mixer?

So that his baseless accusations would have more weight (I have no other explanation).

If this were true, he could easily provide the facts without having to make a donation.