is this enough?

[WellRozey]

Is this enough reason to hate TornadoCash?

Is this why privacy in this crypto space will always struggle?

We have good people who want privacy for good use only, what can be done about people who want to use privacy to hide their enormous crime?

Like this



My brother said

TornadoCash should know that this money isn't clean money, they should have exposed them so that they can be apprehended.

My answer was.

Then who are we going to trust, as someone who cares about privacy, do you think we will want to use such services again when they betrayed their own utility?

Echoes of silence took over. . . the case was closed.


What do you think should be the proper process to go about this?

[_act_]

My brother said

TornadoCash should know that this money isn't clean money, they should have exposed them so that they can be apprehended.

My answer was.

Then who are we going to trust, as someone who cares about privacy, do you think we will want to use such services again when they betrayed their own utility?

TornadoCash is not centralized like you and your brother think, it is decentralized and also noncustodial privacy protocol. There is no central authority or entity that can control it the way it is now.

People should not be careless with their money, they should learn about how they will avoid scam and loss of coins so far they want to take the full responsibility of accessing their coins.

[YellowSwap]

They are clearly showing it to our faces.
Moves like this shows how major exploits and attacks don't just steal funds alone.

It is like saying, since the fund is been moved through Tornado Cash it's gone, people will then move on.
They erode trust showing how hard it is to unwind the damage in the public Blockchains.

[examplens]

What do you think should be the proper process to go about this?

The best thing you can do is take care of your coins. Always do an AML check before you send coins to a service where there is a possibility that your funds will be frozen or taken away. I would follow up on what @_act_ said, by using decentralized privacy protocols, there is always a risk that you will get coins that were part of illegal activities at one time or another.

[noorman0]

If there's an on-chain censorship effort, it's not a decentralized protocol. If holding cryptocurrency is like buying a knife, then it's like demanding that the knife seller identify their buyer as a chef or a hitman. Furthermore, there are privacy measures that governments demand for their own interests, such as end-to-end chat encryption. It's funny how many criminal schemes are built around that medium.

[Yamane_Keto]

hackers use THORSwap (Aggregator) and THORChain (Protocol), yet the blame falls on mixers and TornadoCash, even though these are protocols that can be misused. Their attack targets all privacy services, not because they want to recover these cryptocurrencies.

[Alpha Marine]

It's always funny when people look at things like mixers and say they should be banned because they help criminals.
Imagine saying, "The River Thames in London is used by criminals to dump their dead bodies, murder weapons and other evidence, so it should be dried up". Or saying "The internet has created so many crimes, so it should be banned". You see how silly both statements sound? That's almost how these people sound when they talk about how Bitcoin, non-custodial wallets and mixersare  being used by criminals.

It's even funnier when I see this coming from American law makers and politicians because these are the same people that have refused to pass a law to prohibited the ownership of firearms by civilians despite how much harm guns have caused, yet they're are quick to remember that crypto and other crypto related services should be banned or highly regulated because it "promotes crimes".

[BitMaxz]

I don't know how their service works, but its core function is to break the link between the origin and destination of cryptocurrency transactions, making them more private.

I don't hear of a similar service recording and taking data from its customers, so how can the site reveal customers' information? If there's one then people won't trust to use them again but I believe most of similar services do not require sensitive information.

Weird, I've checked the image above; it looks like a BTC address, and the BTC was sent to Tornado Cash. The weird part is when I check Tornado Cash, it seems there's no option to deposit BTC there. They support other networks, but there's no option to deposit BTC.

[Yamane_Keto]

Weird, I've checked the image above; it looks like a BTC address, and the BTC was sent to Tornado Cash. The weird part is when I check Tornado Cash, it seems there's no option to deposit BTC there. They support other networks, but there's no option to deposit BTC.

They used THORSwap, a multi-chain decentralized exchange where you can exchange BTC for Ethereum, and then use the TornadoCash protocol to make it more difficult to trace the Ethereum coins. Ethereum and TornadoCash option is easier and faster than Bitcoin CoinJoin.



If XMR-RUNE pools are developed and implemented, it may be the fastest option.

[The Cryptovator]

Is this enough reason to hate TornadoCash?

Is this why privacy in this crypto space will always struggle?

We have good people who want privacy for good use only, what can be done about people who want to use privacy to hide their enormous crime?

Not enough. There would be more tools to protect privacy, we can't hate them all. We must hate those who misuse the system. Even corruption happen through banking system, do we hate them? Blackmail happened through fiat cash, do we hate them all? Definitely not, we can't hate the system, rather we should hate the criminal. Rather than blaming a system, we should protect our own system where incidents happen, like exchange and other financial ecosystems. So hacking will be reduced.

Then who are we going to trust, as someone who cares about privacy, do you think we will want to use such services again when they betrayed their own utility?

What do you think should be the proper process to go about this?

If a system is betrayed by their own system and policies, then who is going to use it? If that kind of service starts blocking funds, whether hacked or normal, then no one is going to use it anyway. At least I am. The proper process is to prevent hackers; you can't control any mixers or decentralised systems. If it's controllable then will be useless and no one gonna use it.

[BitMaxz]

They used THORSwap, a multi-chain decentralized exchange where you can exchange BTC for Ethereum, and then use the TornadoCash protocol to make it more difficult to trace the Ethereum coins. Ethereum and TornadoCash option is easier and faster than Bitcoin CoinJoin.



If XMR-RUNE pools are developed and implemented, it may be the fastest option.

Ok, now I understand, so the THORSwap is the bridge. I thought the diagram above was how Tornado Cash works, but this is the whole process from BTC to Ethereum via Thorswap and then Tornado Cash. It's seems it's a bit complicated because Thorswap seems not to support other Bitcoin wallets; it only has 3 supported hardware wallets and 2 for web wallets that I don't recognize.
This process, honestly, would make these coins difficult to trace since we know Tornado Cash is usually used for breaking the link for Ethereum. It looks similar to a Bitcoin tumbler, which is not easy to trace.

If I am imagining this, it is a pretty risky attempt to hide your coins. You'll pay too much just to get anonymized Ethereum coins unless your coins are a big amount and aren't clean.