Topic: Crackdown on mixers and privacy tools is ineffective: it may even help criminals - page 4. (Read 653 times)

BTC Mixers gives BTC<=>BTC

Atomic swaps need coins from two different chains so let's say BTC+x <=> x+BTC

The latter one is a little inconvenient compared to using centralized mixing services but if there is no mixers are in operation then people will look into the alternatives and this one is probably more difficult to trace since it involves coins from multiple chains and I believe that's the point of OP.

That's what the government is trying to ignore, they know this but they just don't want to go with the logical way which is letting the mixers operate normally meanwhile reinforcing their AML organizations, what would a banned mixer do when the AML group in your country is going to suck at doing their job or they're the corrupt kind, there's nothing done to eradicate those money laundering organization. Another thing that I believe why they do this kind of thing is they're focused on prevention and quantity of failed money laundering attempts instead of doing what needs to be done like removing tax exemptions and blocking out loopholes to stop the people that want to evade taxes, if they focus on quality which I hope happens eventually something more significant would happen.

the government's crackdown on mixers is just a futile measure, because no matter how hard they crack down on these services, criminals will still have a way to convert the crypto proceeds from their crimes into fiat without any problems. but maybe that's the only action the government can take because it's within their authority and it would probably show the crypto community that they're capable of shutting down crypto services with their power, but i find it quite comical.

It's disappointing that the government actually will already know this and still continue their own pursuit just to prove that they're the ones with power which is actually dumb. To be frank I don't really know much about atomic swap and for some unknown reason i'm unable to access this site atomic swaps but at least one fact I know is that criminals/hackers will continue to find other ways to go on with their malicious plans, it's inevitable they are innovative.
Sometimes if only the government can see that the more they try the more things becomes worst I guess they would usually think back before doing somethings
 
Fiat currency is still the top of money laundering, I thought when trying to solve a problem one opt for the core but when it comes to bitcoin and privacy they rather just go against them. Data breach is like a common news now to get online in every sectors including health and even children's https://www.malwarebytes.com/blog/news/2024/03/data-brokers-admit-theyre-selling-information-on-precise-location-kids-and-reproductive-healthcare, also we can't always be sure what these brokers are using our data for, I wonder  how they plan on actually regulating this.

Very interesting article. I have a question.
You say that atomic swaps with adaptor signatures are better than centralized BTC mixers. Then what's the point of using BTC mixers anymore?
All the criminals and crypto privacy maniacs should start using atomic swaps with adaptor signatures and coinjoin instead of centralized BTC mixers. Like you've said, having a bigger pool of atomic swap transactions will increase the level of anonymity.
There have always been rumors that the authorities are controlling some of the BTC mixers, I don't know if this is true or not.
I think that BTC mixers have become obsolete, since there are better alternatives, so it doesn't matter if they are going to be banned or not.

For a long time now, authorities above all from the US have been closing mixers and other privacy services and tools operators (like Samourai) and arresting their founders and operators.

They may believe these crackdowns help against money laundering. But that is probably not the case.

Why closing mixers is useless

The reason is simple: If a criminal has some technical abilities, then he can hide his traces on blockchains in several ways without even having to use a privacy tool or mixer: He only has to do a lot of transactions mixing in different sources of funds, for example using CoinJoins and exchanges of coins on different blockchains.

One important method to help with that task are atomic swaps, a trustless method to exchange funds coming from a blockchain for funds on another chain. Traditional atomic swaps still provide a link between the transactions on different blockchains. But a few years ago a new kind of atomic swap was developed which uses adaptor signatures and is already used in Bitcoin-Monero swaps. This method makes the swap private.

This also gives a completely safe path for all criminals to hide their on-chain traces (I purposefully avoid the term "money laundering", see the last paragraph): simply do a couple of atomic swaps and transactions, using different blockchains, and it will be extremely difficult -- probably as difficult as to detect funds going through a centralized mixer -- to link these transactions together. This would even work without recurring to "privacy coins" like Monero.

Why a complete crackdown on privacy services would actually help criminals

In the current crypto services/tools landscape, where mixers are often still centrally or semi-centrally operated, law enforcing authorities have still some chance to stop criminals. For example, a centralized mixer has at least the opportunity to react to orders and petitions of authorities, victims of crime or whitehat hackers. Probably some mixers do cooperate if they still can intervene.

If criminals however went to completely decentralized methods like atomic swaps, nobody could stop them. Only the trade partners, but be honest, how many traders do chain analysis? So you go from a perhaps 20-50% chance to be able to stop criminal transactions due to cooperating mixers down to perhaps 0.01% of atomic swap users which can at least delay atomic swaps - atomic swaps can never be frozen!

It becomes even worse if we take into account the concept of the anonymity set. Currently, there are only few people using atomic swaps. So the anonymity set is relatively low: To achieve a high degree of anonymity, you need a large set of transactions (or "funds origins") to mix your funds with. But the current liquidity of these services provides few "funds origins".

But what will happen if there are no centralized or semi-centralized mixers available? Everybody who wants privacy will use atomic swaps, decentralized CoinJoins and other similar trustless/decentralized services.

Funds going through mixers have mostly been legitimate in many cases. Only in some occasions, where mixer operators probably cooperated with criminals, criminal funds made up a big portion or the majority.

So it's very likely that the anonymity set which can be achieved using atomic swaps will explode. And that will benefit criminals. There will be probably no way to stop them, at least inside the crypto-sphere.

A better approach

Authorities should accept that it is not possible to make it impossible to hide the traces of stolen/hacked/terrorist/sanction-evading funds inside the blockchain world. And the more they view privacy services as enemies, the more difficult it will become to stop criminals. Basically, cryptocurrency should be treated like cash.

Instead, authorities and lawmakers should focus first on the fiat "laundering" operations which emerge when the criminals have converted their funds to fiat, e.g. the creation of fake companies and other traditional methods. Because for "laundering" a criminal needs to end up with "clean" funds, it often doesn't help to have "crypto funds of unclear origin".

But also cooperation with privacy services could help to combat crime. For example, I can imagine a kind of "agreement", preferrently written into clear laws and regulations: A country allows non-KYC mixers, with the requirement that they react to orders and petitions from authorities, whitehat hackers (e.g. in the way the Security Alliance promotes it) and victims of crime, and block their addresses or freezes the funds until it's clear if they are related to a crime or not. It could also help that services could delay processing of funds, requiring more confirmations for a deposit, giving victims and authorities some more time to react.

Would criminals still use techniques like atomic swaps? Probably. But remember what I wrote about the anonymity set: People who use mixers for privacy and not to hide crimes, would be able to use centralized mixers and privacy tools without having to fear anything. So they would probably not massively switch to atomic swaps, and the atomic swap anonymity set would stay small.

There is also the important related topic of the negative consequences of the KYC requirement for all kinds of cryptocurrency services, resulting in data of hundreds of millions or perhaps even already billions of people often stored on relatively unsafe servers, being an interesting target for fraudsters due to the possibilities it provides for identity theft. The linked text from 1miau is really worth reading.

---

In summary: Neither the crackdown on privacy services nor the widespread KYC obligations really help to combat crime.

It may be difficult for an average Bitcoiner to convince their country's authorities of these arguments. But there are possible strategies. Tell your friends about the harm of crackdowns and KYC requirements. Your friends probably are also voters, and the more people understand these things, the more attractive it becomes for politicians to hear. Support privacy on social media. And for those wanting to do a bit more: Participate in pro-privacy organizations like the Electronic Frontier Foundation or the Pirate movement.

---

Edit: I wrote a similar text in Spanish, and possible will also add a German translation.