Restriction laws on mixer.

[Z-tight]

Does the government want to know the assumed people who are seeking for privacy through mixers? it sounds funny.

They want to be able to retrieve information about certain customers when they want to, so they can go after them if they suspect them of any wrongdoing.

If mixers implement KYC, what will now be the difference between them and CEX

Not much. Because one can effectively 'mix' their coins in centralized exchanges and hide from everyone but the government, just that you lose your privacy in doing so. Now, if mixers also collect the same data, then nothing differentiates them.

Mixers are gradually losing what made them privacy tools.

This has not been implemented. It is just another proposal from the government to directly attack privacy, as they have always done.

[MarryWithBTC]

Does the government want to know the assumed people who are seeking for privacy through mixers? it sounds funny.

They want to be able to retrieve information about certain customers when they want to, so they can go after them if they suspect them of any wrongdoing.

Being curious, will there ever be a time that mixers will operate with the government model? Where they will save users info and willing to hand it to the government when they are compelled to?

If mixers implement KYC, what will now be the difference between them and CEX

Not much. Because one can effectively 'mix' their coins in centralized exchanges and hide from everyone but the government, just that you lose your privacy in doing so. Now, if mixers also collect the same data, then nothing differentiates them.

Even the exchanges would be better off at this point. It will just force people to using DEXs in a private way.

Mixers are gradually losing what made them privacy tools.

This has not been implemented. It is just another proposal from the government to directly attack privacy, as they have always done.

Glad to know and I wish it remains a proposal.

[zasad@]

I'm not against governments, but if the government wants to control everything, it should also ensure the security of cryptocurrency owners.

They claim kyc and aml policy is also for customer protection, yet people still often lose their funds in custodial platforms, with no way of recovering it. Strict regulation in my own opinion is about control and not really about protecting customers. And as such people should never store their coins in any centralized exchange or custodial platform.

The government wants to control citizens and their cryptocurrencies; the government wants all citizens to pay taxes on cryptocurrency transactions. Bills are currently being drafted in Russia that would require citizens to declare all their wallets and conduct exchanges only through licensed cryptocurrency exchange services in compliance with KYC and AML regulations.
Soon, many people will become criminals.

[m2017]

1. they most register with FinCEN: a mixer can operate if they can register with FinCEN but if they are not register with FinCEN they are illegal and cannot operate.   

As usual, regulators require everyone to be registered and accountable. Either you play by their rules, or you're outlawed.

But what if a mixer is decentralized, automated, and operates without human intervention? How does it register?

Mixers can only "survive" by becoming decentralized (and upholding people's freedom), i.e., with a distributed ledger, like blockchain, so regulators can't shut them down.

2. they must Implement KYC (Know Your Customer): this is also one of the things a mixer most do, they need to make KYC compulsory for their customers, if they can’t do this they can’t operate.

A mixer with a KYC is as absurd as sex for the sake of virginity.

3. they most always report suspicious transactions: they most report any suspicious transactions they notice in their mixer if they are not doing or don’t accept to do this they can’t operate.

Who will determine whether transactions are suspicious? By what criteria? Will the regulator issue a manual with instructions for mixer operators?

The restrictions laws on mixer those it limit financial freedom or the restriction law is protecting the society.
What do you think.

These laws make the work of mixers meaningless, i.e., under these laws, mixers cease to be mixers and become "money transfer operators".

[zasad@]

Who will determine whether transactions are suspicious? By what criteria? Will the regulator issue a manual with instructions for mixer operators?

There's the Financial Action Task Force (FATF) and well-known companies that develop AML checkers, like Crystal. If a mixer requires the KYC procedure and uses AML checkers, no one will use it, because it's the same as a crypto exchange.

[SuperBitMan]

3. they most always report suspicious transactions: they most report any suspicious transactions they notice in their mixer if they are not doing or don’t accept to do this they can’t operate.

Mixers are gradually losing what made them privacy tools.

Yeah and that’s because of the government. the government believe that the privacy in mixer is helping criminals to escape easily and that is why they are fighting against mixer and try to have control over them by implementing KYC in mixer, if a KYC is implemented in mixer there’s no privacy in it anymore.
I see some reasons why government is against mixer, and I don’t think the government will ever give mixer that full privacy they once had, some people argue that privacy is something that everyone should have especially when it concerns their finance and they are right, but government always like to know how everything is going in their country especially when it concerns money.
But I believe they can allow privacy in mixer and then look for another way to always catch up with criminals.

[Alpha Marine]

Being curious, will there ever be a time that mixers will operate with the government model? Where they will save users info and willing to hand it to the government when they are compelled to?

One way or the other, things will get to this level sometime. Things may seem cool now, but as time goes on, there will be so much pressure on mixers that if they want to operate in certain countries, they will need to comply with the government. They will need to have a compromise with the government if they want to keep existing. I guess in the end, they will need to filter the kind of coins they accept. When people send "tainted" coins to them, they might not accept them. The ones that do will have to do so underground or something; in a way, it can't be linked to that mixer.
I don't know how it would be, but the governments of countries, especially the US and Europe, will find a way to crack down on mixers with time, and the mixers will have to compromise if they want to continue.

[MarryWithBTC]

Being curious, will there ever be a time that mixers will operate with the government model? Where they will save users info and willing to hand it to the government when they are compelled to?

One way or the other, things will get to this level sometime. Things may seem cool now, but as time goes on, there will be so much pressure on mixers that if they want to operate in certain countries, they will need to comply with the government. They will need to have a compromise with the government if they want to keep existing. I guess in the end, they will need to filter the kind of coins they accept. When people send "tainted" coins to them, they might not accept them. The ones that do will have to do so underground or something; in a way, it can't be linked to that mixer.
I don't know how it would be, but the governments of countries, especially the US and Europe, will find a way to crack down on mixers with time, and the mixers will have to compromise if they want to continue.

Concerning getting to the stage where mixers will comply with the government KYC policy, that stage will be the stage for the final burial of privacy. But then, there are few individuals that will still remain extremely private through decentralized routing.

The idea of tainted coins, clean and dirty bitcoin was introduced by the government. That difference is the privacy trap. From the original satoshi idea, bitcoin is bitcoin. No dirty or clean bitcoin. But the government has invented those discrepancies which was the reason mixers started existing for the bad players. Ordinarily, not reusing same address would have solved the basic privacy need in bitcoin.

[zasad@]

Yeah and that’s because of the government. the government believe that the privacy in mixer is helping criminals to escape easily and that is why they are fighting against mixer and try to have control over them by implementing KYC in mixer, if a KYC is implemented in mixer there’s no privacy in it anymore.
I see some reasons why government is against mixer, and I don’t think the government will ever give mixer that full privacy they once had, some people argue that privacy is something that everyone should have especially when it concerns their finance and they are right, but government always like to know how everything is going in their country especially when it concerns money.
But I believe they can allow privacy in mixer and then look for another way to always catch up with criminals.

Let's look at this problem from a different angle. What's stopping the government from creating its own mixer without KYC?
The government could hunt down other mixers that don't cooperate with governments with the help of some intelligence agencies and develop their own services with the help of other intelligence agencies.
And then there's a big surprise. We can't trust anyone except algorithms like Monero's.

[PrivacyG]

The government wants to control citizens and their cryptocurrencies; the government wants all citizens to pay taxes on cryptocurrency transactions. Bills are currently being drafted in Russia that would require citizens to declare all their wallets and conduct exchanges only through licensed cryptocurrency exchange services in compliance with KYC and AML regulations.
Soon, many people will become criminals.

And this is going to happen all around the world.  I do expect that we all who want Privacy and we all who will use Monero will become criminals.  The big problem was the existence of Bitcoin.  The solution is to turn Bitcoin into something as close to a 'CBDC' as they can.

When you have to declare all your Wallets and every thing you do with your Bitcoin and you comply, what is the difference between having Bitcoin or owning the national Digital Currency?  If anything, it makes you want the Digital Currency.  You do not have to note down every thing you do, it already sits in a very centralized ledger that records and calculates it all for you instantly.

-----

Let's look at this problem from a different angle. What's stopping the government from creating its own mixer without KYC?
The government could hunt down other mixers that don't cooperate with governments with the help of some intelligence agencies and develop their own services with the help of other intelligence agencies.
And then there's a big surprise. We can't trust anyone except algorithms like Monero's.

Nothing is stopping them, I am already assuming they have created a few no Know Your Customer mixers.  Hell.  One of us could be promoting one such service right now.  Who the hell knows any more.  Did three letter agencies not also create a lot of fake Onion honey pot shops?  The question is not what is stopping them, the question is why would they not do it!  They are already hunting down the ones who do not obey.  There are honeypots already out there.  I would generally advice to use a combination of multiple methods of getting Privacy.  If you create a habit of using mixers, Monero, Coin Joins, Atomic Swaps, Tor and Peer to Peer transactions, you are going to make their job hell.

[zasad@]

The government wants to control citizens and their cryptocurrencies; the government wants all citizens to pay taxes on cryptocurrency transactions. Bills are currently being drafted in Russia that would require citizens to declare all their wallets and conduct exchanges only through licensed cryptocurrency exchange services in compliance with KYC and AML regulations.
Soon, many people will become criminals.

And this is going to happen all around the world.  I do expect that we all who want Privacy and we all who will use Monero will become criminals.  The big problem was the existence of Bitcoin.  The solution is to turn Bitcoin into something as close to a 'CBDC' as they can.

When you have to declare all your Wallets and every thing you do with your Bitcoin and you comply, what is the difference between having Bitcoin or owning the national Digital Currency?  If anything, it makes you want the Digital Currency.  You do not have to note down every thing you do, it already sits in a very centralized ledger that records and calculates it all for you instantly.

-----

Let's look at this problem from a different angle. What's stopping the government from creating its own mixer without KYC?
The government could hunt down other mixers that don't cooperate with governments with the help of some intelligence agencies and develop their own services with the help of other intelligence agencies.
And then there's a big surprise. We can't trust anyone except algorithms like Monero's.

Nothing is stopping them, I am already assuming they have created a few no Know Your Customer mixers.  Hell.  One of us could be promoting one such service right now.  Who the hell knows any more.  Did three letter agencies not also create a lot of fake Onion honey pot shops?  The question is not what is stopping them, the question is why would they not do it!  They are already hunting down the ones who do not obey.  There are honeypots already out there.  I would generally advice to use a combination of multiple methods of getting Privacy.  If you create a habit of using mixers, Monero, Coin Joins, Atomic Swaps, Tor and Peer to Peer transactions, you are going to make their job hell.

It turns out that the Monero coin also has shortcomings, and the user should read this information.
https://moneroleaks.xyz/
These are unique cases, but for security reasons you should not use the same Monero address more than once.

I don't know what will happen globally, but the opposite is happening in Russia. To eliminate the shadow market, we need to reduce the amount of cash in circulation. But in Russia, the internet is often down, and even in Moscow, electronic payment methods sometimes don't work. While many people used to go years without holding cash, now probably 90% of people withdraw cash from ATMs to carry it around with them

[yhiaali3]

It turns out that the Monero coin also has shortcomings, and the user should read this information.
https://moneroleaks.xyz/
These are unique cases, but for security reasons you should not use the same Monero address more than once.

Thank you for sharing the link. This information actually piqued my interest, so I decided to delve deeper into the issue of using the same Monero address more than once to find out what the problem or security vulnerability is.

It became clear to me that Monero could be tracked via malicious nodes, as some media leaks revealed that Chainalysis deployed a large number of malicious Monero nodes worldwide to capture users' IP addresses, record transaction times, and then link this data to decoys, thus reducing the level of anonymity in some cases.
Leaked Video Suggests Monero Transactions May Be Traceable

[zasad@]

It turns out that the Monero coin also has shortcomings, and the user should read this information.
https://moneroleaks.xyz/
These are unique cases, but for security reasons you should not use the same Monero address more than once.

Thank you for sharing the link. This information actually piqued my interest, so I decided to delve deeper into the issue of using the same Monero address more than once to find out what the problem or security vulnerability is.

It became clear to me that Monero could be tracked via malicious nodes, as some media leaks revealed that Chainalysis deployed a large number of malicious Monero nodes worldwide to capture users' IP addresses, record transaction times, and then link this data to decoys, thus reducing the level of anonymity in some cases.
Leaked Video Suggests Monero Transactions May Be Traceable

I think hackers have known about this for a long time and are able to hide their IP addresses through various proxies and VPN services. Hackers will then use additional methods, such as mixers and transferring coins to other blockchains, which will ultimately be very difficult to track.
But such cases with Monero are very rare, indicating the great difficulty of deanonymizing wallet owners.

[BlackHatCoiner]

When you have to declare all your Wallets and every thing you do with your Bitcoin and you comply, what is the difference between having Bitcoin or owning the national Digital Currency?

I don't think that Bitcoin will ever become a Digital Currency, like that. Large amounts of bitcoin will be difficult to liquidate without going through a third party exchange, but relatively small amounts can always be spent using a decentralized exchange pretty privately. You can neither liquidate Monero in large sums.

The value proposition of Monero is to conveniently transact on-chain anonymously. It does not magically make the system bend towards privacy or create on- & off-ramps with physical cash. 

[zasad@]

Pavel Durov(C)
https://x.com/durov/status/2047757236508704922

"41 kidnappings of crypto holders in France in 3.5 months of 2026.

Why?

French tax officials selling crypto owners' data to criminals (Ghalia C.) + massive tax database leaks.

Now the state also wants IDs and private messages of social media users.

More data = More victims."

[NeuroticFish]

Pavel Durov(C)
https://x.com/durov/status/2047757236508704922

"41 kidnappings of crypto holders in France in 3.5 months of 2026.

Why?

French tax officials selling crypto owners' data to criminals (Ghalia C.) + massive tax database leaks.

Now the state also wants IDs and private messages of social media users.

More data = More victims."

While he's correct in this, I would be careful with what is Pavel Durov saying.
He is biased and I would not be surprised at all if we'll find out that Telegram is even less private than it claims.
Plus, his encounters with various authorities may (or may not) have had different outcomes than what was publicly said.

[zasad@]

Pavel Durov(C)
https://x.com/durov/status/2047757236508704922

"41 kidnappings of crypto holders in France in 3.5 months of 2026.

Why?

French tax officials selling crypto owners' data to criminals (Ghalia C.) + massive tax database leaks.

Now the state also wants IDs and private messages of social media users.

More data = More victims."

While he's correct in this, I would be careful with what is Pavel Durov saying.
He is biased and I would not be surprised at all if we'll find out that Telegram is even less private than it claims.
Plus, his encounters with various authorities may (or may not) have had different outcomes than what was publicly said.

Many people in Russia distrust Pavel Durov and dismiss his behavior as mere PR for a "freedom fighter." But the government isn't interested in cryptocurrency owners' Telegram channels. Governments typically monitor channels that engage in political activity and could influence public opinion and political elections, or that are plotting crimes against state authorities.

[NeuroticFish]

But the government isn't interested in cryptocurrency owners' Telegram channels. Governments typically monitor channels that engage in political activity and could influence public opinion and political elections, or that are plotting crimes against state authorities.

Actually I think that the governments' agencies simply run various queries on certain keywords on *all* the discussions, no matter it's from crypto owners or not.
Nowadays I would not be surprised if they involve even AI to check for potential secret meanings.

It all depends on how eager is the "network" to provide them the data to search into.

[zasad@]

But the government isn't interested in cryptocurrency owners' Telegram channels. Governments typically monitor channels that engage in political activity and could influence public opinion and political elections, or that are plotting crimes against state authorities.

Actually I think that the governments' agencies simply run various queries on certain keywords on *all* the discussions, no matter it's from crypto owners or not.
Nowadays I would not be surprised if they involve even AI to check for potential secret meanings.

It all depends on how eager is the "network" to provide them the data to search into.

If that were true, the Russian police would have caught all the scammers long ago. Criminal cases typically reveal that the data is obtained from the phone of someone who voluntarily granted access or was obtained using hacking tools. Telegram does not cooperate with the police.

The secret services are monitoring the channels of opposition figures and foreign agents, who have long been known to everyone, and they do not have the resources to monitor the millions of channels of petty criminals.

[Lucius]

If that were true, the Russian police would have caught all the scammers long ago.
~snip~

The same police you can bribe for anything, anywhere? There is crime and scams everywhere, but in Russia crime and corruption go to the very top - unless you think your president honestly earned $200 billion he is hiding from the public?

By the way, PD wasn't released from French custody just like that, he obviously gave them something, and now let everyone draw their own conclusions about what it could be...