Topic: [banned mixer] - Bitcoin mixer | 50+ BTC in reserves are confirmed! - page 4. (Read 2271 times)

Maybe. But I personally think OP clearly doesn't realize the threat model they will have to face and counter.

Given also how long time it took for OP to understand the importance and rationale of LoG, I'd say the OP is relatively new in this industry without significant experience in operational/informational security and probably doesn't understand their threat model's top element is state. I would think twice trusting this service any sensitive information such as UTXO flows since I doubt they can provide a security level required for operating a mixer.

A new mixer of course is always welcome, but the problem here is that if the operator isn't experienced enough, significant gaps in security and IT knowledge may cost their users serious problems later, since it usually takes one mistake to have the whole operation compromised when your enemy is state. Note that ability to code a mixer doesn't mean ability to secure operations properly.

I would expect something like this after a first subpoena or letter from FBI on their email:


Or even worse - them being investigated low-profile then suddely having their servers seized with all the customer data compromised. Happened to some of the best in case you are familiar with historical events of services on this forum

Playing devil's advocate here. Maybe OP just thinks there's a different level of sharing classified stuff here? Sharing info through messages that the government might see later is one thing.  But publishing it for all to easily find is something else. 

Anyone using the service can probably guess the original addresses and wallets from the transactions.  But that ain't the same as having the concrete prof, signed address out there for all to see clear as day.  thats a whole different thing putting it out there like that.

Just thinking out loud over here.

Very interesting that OP was loudly opposing to provide the signed proof of reserves highlighting risks of undermining security of mixing operations and their users, but then simply sends the sensitive data over a state-controlled unencrypted communication channel, instead of relying on a more secure alternative offered (email that supports end-to-end encryption). It's either hypocrisy or incompetence.

Over my time on this forum, I've witnessed enough to confidently vouch for the trustworthiness of both icopress and LoyceV in this matter. I trust their judgment and their assurance that they've verified the signed messages validating the [banned mixer] reserve funds.

Sorry, i'm not interested to verify it. More member trust @LoyceV than me and in terms of technical knowledge, there are also some member who outperform me.

I'll add here my two cents, if I may. I remember I read about this company back in April, yet it seems things are changed now.

I was not involved in this discussion since its beginning, but I kept an eye on it.

What I want to add here is that icopress is, for sure, a very trustworthy forum user and he received many appreciations for his professionalism during years. If he says he received the signed messages I believe him.

At same time, LV is another very trustworthy forum user and, in case he will also confirm the messages from PureMixer all doubts are solved.

Both of them are persons which I'd trust to cash out my salary each month and I'd be more than sure they would give me my money back.

Later edit: Loyce posted just when I was writing this and it seems we have his confirmation as well.

Confirmed.

That seems futile after sending it through Cloudflare, but I've deleted the PM. Note that the PM stays on the forum's server until you delete it from your outbox.

We thank icopress for his cooperation.

Yes, we sent an identical letter confirming the reserves to the user LoyceV. We also expect ETFbitcoin if he shows interest in this.

we also want to note that icopress and LoyceV were informed in order to permanently delete the signed message after checking and making sure of its legitimacy.

So I'll be as brief as possible.

- I received 8 signed messages, each of which included my name and the current date.
- The balances of 8 Bitcoin addresses were replenished at approximately the same time and contained a total of more than 50 Bitcoins.
- All signatures are authentic and verified using Electrum so I confirm that PureMixer has significant Bitcoin reserves.

I hope Loyce will join us and will also let you know if he received a similar letter from PureMixer.

@ETFbitcoin, are you in business? 

You can have USD as an option in the calculator, but I don't see the possibility of choosing BTC. The service is mixing BTC, not FIAT, it is clear from the story why all competitors use it that way. This is a suggestion, not an attack, and it is up to you how you will do it.

How absurd it is, here is an example. I got the result that on the mixed 1000 USD, I get back 995 USD, but I have to calculate -0.0005 BTC on that. In doing so, which Bitcoin exchange rate did you take into account? A simple thing, but so complicated that I'm losing interest in using your service




@ETFbitcoin was recently active in this thread. As they have a proven knowledge of Bitcoin, I suggest them as another member for this verification. If he wants, of course.

OP wanted to remove all doubt I had about this on April 15. It is indeed not necessary to prove current ownership.

I’m not sure that this is necessary if a message is signed confirming the availability of reserves at the moment.

My feedback has a time stamp. If I ever need to update it, I'll add another one.

This makes no sense. Anyone who trusts me, would trust my word for it. Anyone who doesn't trust me, also wouldn't trust whoever I pick. So I'm not picking anyone.

Hello, Icopress! We fully share your opinion on this.

Yes, we stated that the maximum amount that a client can mix in our mixer is 56 BTC. We have not made statements regarding the reserve directly. But yes, the fact that the maximum amount we have declared for mixing = 56 BTC suggests that at least this amount should be in our reserve. Some trusted users do not believe in the presence of 56 BTC in our reserve - we agree. We ourselves have given them reason to think so in the past. Well... we are ready to go for it and sign part of our bitcoin reserves (if it is really that important to you guys). It will not be easy to sign "technically" the entire amount, yes, but it is possible. But another thing is that a certain amount scattered over many wallets, as a result of mixing, leads to users, and it will be impossible to sign it for other reasons, namely: for reasons of confidentiality and our "No Log" principle, since a certain number of bitcoins have been mixed and sent to users during our existence. Therefore, in fact, we will get into their "pocket" and undermine their anonymity, which is unacceptable to us and which we will never resort to under any circumstances. We hope you understand and appreciate it.

Our main motivation to implement the calculator in USD, rather than in BTC, was that all our competitors (who have a calculator) - the calculation goes in BTC. And we decided to stand out so that users have a choice: use the calculator in USD or in BTC.

0.0005 BTC - for a reason. For this fee, the client can receive his funds from several transactions, even if he filled out an order form with one address to receive (this does not matter). + Our service always sends a transaction to the user with a sufficient Sat/b commission (including to avoid network congestion, which we are currently observing). This is so, for general understanding. Thank you.

Right.

We can hold some kind of competition or distribution of deposits to test the service. There are no problems with this. But this "action" should be carried out after the weakening of the Bitcoin network commissions. I think you will agree with us.

- Yes, your feedback at that time was accurate. We don't argue. But now everything has changed, and we just asked to edit the message in view of the current state of the service. If you don't want to do it, don't. This is not so fundamental.
- In fact, we didn't lie to you and all the users of the forum. First of all, we lied to ourselves in view of our incorrect vision on this score. Note that after your constructive explanation to us about the letter of guarantee and the essence of its importance, we did not continue to discuss and "bend our line of truth" as we took this into account, realized and developed it and eventually corrected it and admitted the mistake. This is about the letter of guarantee.

You also publicly expressed the following:
And we are ready to eradicate this doubt. Many refer to you so that we sign bitcoins for you. And as we answered above, we are ready for it.

---

My feedback was accurate, and my neutral feedback on your profile stays. There's nothing to "correct". You're in the trust business. You lied, I'll never trust you.

I can confirm now clearnet version also doesn't make request data to external website. I've edited my posts.

After looking over what I said earlier about your service, I don't see anything I should correct and  what I wrote fits with how your mixing service worked at that time.

Your service had some real issues that needed fixing.  But hey, at least you're admitting now that you messed up and accepting well-intentioned criticism. Better late than never, right? It's good that you want to improve things moving forward.  I respect that. 

I don't think now's a good time to evaluate your mixing service considering the issues with Bitcoin network congestion lately.  But maybe you could organize some kind of contest or campaign to get people on this forum to test out and review your service? Get a handful of members to try it out and give feedback and  that might help generate some buzz.

Now I was looking at your calculator and I'm surprised that the only offered calculation option is in dollars. Isn't Bitcoin being mixed here, not Dollars and are the mixed coins I receive converted according to the BTC/USD ratio?
Also, the additional 0.0005 has to be calculated afterwards, so your calculator is completely useless. During the whole mix process, I had no idea how much bitcoin I should expect.


You forgot to add the fixed fee per address "It varies from 0.5% to 2.5% + 0.0005 BTC per each target address."

This is really great news. I don’t think there is a more effective tool for resolving any disputes than a letter of guarantee. 

Despite the fact that my opinion may be subjective, it still seems to me that I speak for the majority. I remember that initially you made some statements regarding your reserves, statements to which trusted forum users were quite skeptical.

Therefore, I suggest that you consider selecting one or two users and showing them a signed message confirming the availability of your reserves. I am also sure that there is no need to confirm the full amount of your Bitcoin reserves, since I understand perfectly well that technically this can be problematic.

But at the same time, I am inclined to think that confirming at least 30% of your reserves will add significance to previously spoken words and at the same time demonstrate the seriousness of your intentions to thoroughly gain a foothold in this niche of privacy-oriented projects.

I would recommend that you choose LoyceV, since I don't know anyone who values their or others' privacy more. This user is also one of the most trusted users of the forum, so I believe that this is the most suitable candidate. Of course, you can also choose me to check a signed ... I could tell a lot of good things about myself, but I'm afraid that it would not be ethical (so you will have to rely only on the feedback history about me).


By the way, it seems to me that the commission fee, even at 0.5/2.5%, is really low (considering how much privacy costs in modern realities). For that matter, you might also want to consider introducing a “pay what you want” type of commission fee. I know of one mixer that uses a similar strategy, and it has been the most successful mixer in the last few years.