 |
Today at 01:01:26 AM |
|
When we talk about privacy in CoinJoin protocols, it’s easy to focus on features like anonymity sets or denomination flexibility. Yet the health and transparency of the coordinator itself often get overlooked. As more wallets adopt the WabiSabi variant of Wasabi’s protocol, the number of third-party coordinators is growing — some better documented than others.
Here are a few points the community should care about:
- Non‑custodial by design: A coordinator should never have custody of your coins. It’s worth checking whether the operator has published a clear threat model explaining how they handle transaction data and potential attack surfaces.
- No‑KYC, no logs: If a coordinator requires identification or stores logs, it defeats the purpose of CoinJoin. Look for an explicit no‑KYC/no‑log policy and, ideally, endpoints reachable over Tor and HTTPS.
- Verifiable transparency: It’s one thing to claim 99% uptime and high liquidity; it’s another to publish live metrics and warrant canaries. Coordinators that offer dashboards or periodic transparency reports make it easier to gauge reliability.
- Post‑mix guidance: Honest operators provide guidance on endpoint hygiene and address reuse to help users maintain privacy after the mix. It’s not just about completing a transaction; it’s about what comes next.
One coordinator that recently caught my attention is swisscoordinator.app. It ticks many of the boxes above: non‑custodial, no KYC, Tor/HTTPS endpoints, and publishes a warrant canary and threat model. They’ve also shared live telemetry and have committed to audits and public metrics feeds. I’m not endorsing it over others, but I appreciate the level of transparency. Comparing this with other services like zkSNACKs, Samourai’s Whirlpool or JoinMarket could help establish best practices for the whole ecosystem.
What other coordinators are people using, and how transparent are they? Do you think public metrics should become a standard? Would love to hear more examples and experiences.
|
