Why is there so much crackdown on mixers?
When they complain about money laundering and all, does it not also happen in the conventional financial sector, how many times have they shut down banks cos of such, why must crypto be the target of these institutions?
I ask these questions because it only takes a degree of silence for one to be extinguished from a space, let that one not be crypto being extinguished from the financial space.
Topic: The fate of mixers. (Read 286 times)
In my opinion, in the future we will see mixers that will refuse to mix coins from hacks or any other criminals activity.
In order to achieve that, a high level of blockchain analytics is necessary, so they can automatically refuse coins from some addresses.
In order to achieve that, a high level of blockchain analytics is necessary, so they can automatically refuse coins from some addresses.
This is the only way that they can do that, but mixers do their things automatically because it works like a cronjob and if they tried to block certain address its possible that its a false positive and the user will file a complaint and this will ruin their reputation.
Their blockchain analytics if they are going to use one should be proficient to block address if its not, people will file accusations and of course being a mixer they cannot ask for KYC its against their niche because they are anonymity based.
Running a mixer is a risky business but there's a market on the use of mixer, so they are will operate until they are stopped by authorities.
Do the mixers actually know where transactions are coming from, maybe to not allow the transaction if it's from a criminal organisation. For instance, if Mr Bob wants to mix bitcoin he used to purchase arms in the darker, will Sinbad know that the particular coin is coming from dark net transactions? If No, it therefore means all mixers are vulnerable and can be taken down at anytime.
Mixers are doing their job just to maintain user's privacy, scammers are also using the banks to make deposit and there's nothing they can do about it as long as they are not making a request on how they source fund their money, the gover should better understand this that mixers are not the bad actors here, it's the people, but can they regulate this, obviously no, you shouldn't be able to be questioned on the source to your fund you have, the real theives are the governments here.
In my opinion, in the future we will see mixers that will refuse to mix coins from hacks or any other criminals activity.
In order to achieve that, a high level of blockchain analytics is necessary, so they can automatically refuse coins from some addresses.
But how do those mixers know if those coins come from hacks or criminal activity, sure there's going to be some coins that will be marked or tainted that the mixers can see and they can't accept but I am sure that there's going to be some smartass criminals that would use a way to buy a clean bitcoins and then it's just a breeze for them after that and even if they do that, there's still Monero doing it's thang being the privacy coin that it promises itself to be. In order to achieve that, a high level of blockchain analytics is necessary, so they can automatically refuse coins from some addresses.
Who cares with the tainted bullshit, we don't even know about the money flow behind banks, they can bribe the banks and use it for money laundering. The government is jealous because they didn't earn tax from the mixing services, since they have power, they can crackdown everything that didn't follow their rules/wants.
The result of every mixer is being seized by government, if the mixer is big and can survive really really long, I'm skeptical if the mixer might be a honeypot.
The result of every mixer is being seized by government, if the mixer is big and can survive really really long, I'm skeptical if the mixer might be a honeypot.
As we have seen with centralized exchanges, even the strictest KYC policies and blockchain surveillance aren't 100% effective at preventing criminals from using their platform. Anything that provides privacy will be seen as a bad thing by law enforcement so I suspect that even if mixers tried to be compliant there will still be sanctions, fines and arrests.
And that's what we're seeing right now. They're not directly telling that mixing coins is legal but with their actions, we see that it's looking like an illegal action and they have to take down. But that's possible in the future that they will only "clean" coins on their end because they have a business to protect. Anyway, we're already seeing the defeat purpose of Bitcoin that it's for decentralization while exchanges are forcing centralization together with government policies applied to us.
In my opinion, in the future we will see mixers that will refuse to mix coins from hacks or any other criminals activity.
In order to achieve that, a high level of blockchain analytics is necessary, so they can automatically refuse coins from some addresses.
In order to achieve that, a high level of blockchain analytics is necessary, so they can automatically refuse coins from some addresses.
As we have seen with centralized exchanges, even the strictest KYC policies and blockchain surveillance aren't 100% effective at preventing criminals from using their platform. Anything that provides privacy will be seen as a bad thing by law enforcement so I suspect that even if mixers tried to be compliant there will still be sanctions, fines and arrests.
Mixers will remain a constantly controversial issue between supporters and opponents. On the one hand, they are a good service for preserving identity, and on the other hand, they are used by criminals to hide their crimes.
It's a controversy that can't be separated, because criminals would be happy if mixers still existed so that they can mix millions of dollars in coins in one go, on the other hand as an intermediary who wants to remain private it is still difficult to imagine that mixers are now used more for crime.Mixers, like anything else, have a positive and negative side, but governments only look at the negative side and accuse everyone who uses Mixers of using them for illegal purposes.
Because the government wants to remain in control, if someone uses a mixer for privacy purposes then it will be suspected and will certainly be considered illegal.Therefore, this conflict will most likely continue to exist between governments and users who want to maintain their privacy, and since mixers are financially profitable, they will most likely continue to exist despite government opposition.
I think this conflict will not end and if one mixer has been confiscated by the FBI or other agencies, other mixers will appear because there are still quite a lot of mixer enthusiasts even though it is dominated by the crimes they commit.I want to ask, is there a mixer owner in response to being tried and then in prison?
Curious question, What if flagged wallet address of Mixer use different mixer to mix their coins? Is this means that they can dragged down any competitors that they want?
Nope; I assume it only goes up to the first few dozen transactions; it would be absurd for someone to get flagged because of a transaction chain with 100 links in it traces back to someone else's dirty money.
Maybe in the future, there will be an interaction between authorities and mixing industries to add protection to their platform from being used by money launderers.
This impossible to achieve if mixers want to protect anonymity since any touch of authority will surely remove anonymity especially when screening illegal transactions on the mixer.
This cycle will repeat over and over since there’s a demand while there’s no solution on screening illegal transactions without affecting the anonymity of the mixing service.
Curious question, What if flagged wallet address of Mixer use different mixer to mix their coins? Is this means that they can dragged down any competitors that they want?
SEE my question,
Do the mixers actually know where transactions are coming from, maybe to not allow the transaction if it's from a criminal organisation. For instance, if Mr Bob wants to mix bitcoin he used to purchase arms in the darker, will Sinbad know that the particular coin is coming from dark net transactions? If No, it therefore means all mixers are vulnerable and can be taken down at anytime.
If Mixers has its way it wants to remain in this business as long as it can because there's a big demand for mixers but they have no control over every coming transaction, it cannot just flag addresses because it will ruin its reputation and they have to prove that the address is tarnished, there's already an announcement that mixers are not illegal it just so happens that they are being exploited by criminals.
Maybe in the future, there will be an interaction between authorities and mixing industries to add protection to their platform from being used by money launderers.
Mixers will remain a constantly controversial issue between supporters and opponents. On the one hand, they are a good service for preserving identity, and on the other hand, they are used by criminals to hide their crimes.
Mixers, like anything else, have a positive and negative side, but governments only look at the negative side and accuse everyone who uses Mixers of using them for illegal purposes.
Therefore, this conflict will most likely continue to exist between governments and users who want to maintain their privacy, and since mixers are financially profitable, they will most likely continue to exist despite government opposition.
Mixers, like anything else, have a positive and negative side, but governments only look at the negative side and accuse everyone who uses Mixers of using them for illegal purposes.
Therefore, this conflict will most likely continue to exist between governments and users who want to maintain their privacy, and since mixers are financially profitable, they will most likely continue to exist despite government opposition.
What is the fate of mixers in the cryptocurrency industry?
The fate of mixers in the crypto industry has never been certain and the Sinbad incident is only one of the cases that have happened and will soon be forgotten. But mixers continue to flourish in the crypto world as anonymity is the order of the day. The owners of the mixers that were pulldown by the government today might continue to open other ones, this is not new unless you didn't notice. Some still had the alternatives even before the government pulled it down, then they continued with it and may also open another new alternative, and it goes on like that.Also, there are many of them already, the government can't pull all down unless they trace illicit activities to them. This is even as there are decentralised ones that I've never heard the government pulls down before.
Quote
For instance, if Mr Bob wants to mix bitcoin he used to purchase arms in the darker, will Sinbad know that the particular coin is coming from dark net transactions? If No, it therefore means all mixers are vulnerable and can be taken down at anytime.
The truth is that they know at times, but at times too, they may not know, regardless, anyone mixing coins is mainly to be blamed since mixers can't know all intentions. 
There are two kinds of people in life,
Those who say that mixing is a right,
And those who don't.
Those who say that mixing is a right,
And those who don't.
Sadly though, those who uses it for the right reasons are being affected negatively, and it's part and parcel of it.
Looking at the fate of mixers, we all know that history will repeat itself. And if we try to uproot the causes, as per their report it should be the Lazarus group.
But any government for that matter, not just the US can't bring it down that easy.
As pointed out by LoyceV:
This puts us in the problem of defining the minimum that a mixer must provide in order to be described as legal, or in other words, how did the regulators know that In the case of Sinbad.io, more than 50 percent of all mixed cryptocurrencies were found to have a criminal origin.Quote
In the case of Sinbad.io, more than 50 percent of all mixed cryptocurrencies were found to have a criminal origin. In the case of Sinbad. io, there are no measures in place to implement and enforce a Know Your Customer (KYC) or Know Your Transaction (KYT) policy.
Without seizing the servers, and having the customers’ data recorded and then ensuring that the percentage is higher than 50% and then arresting them, this was determined in advance when they tracked the servers and tried to shut down the service.
I think that the government's policy towards the mixers will be to force them to provide and record data and close every large mixer that does not cooperate.
There is an endless discussion that involes freedom of speech and freedom of privacy. Mixers are good but can be used by criminals and North Korean hackers. Is "bad people use it" enough to prevent actual privacy seekers? I for one would like for mixers to continue to exist, and in a utopian way, only be used by good people.
Seems like Lazarus group is a root cause of all mixer seizures recent years. Seems like Lazarus group is a favorite target of many governments and authorities so that if any mixer is used by Lazarus group, it will be automatically put in a black list of governments, authorities and will be in list of seizure attempts from governments.The quote is interesting but it is true. Recent weeks, there is a lawsuit about Tornado Cash. A source code, a service is considered as a criminal tool but is it true by laws.
They have been the bane of all crypto world in my opinion, they have been in offensive, exchanges, gambling platform and anything that they can get their hands as we all know that this is state sponsored hacking group.
So yeah, it will be a endless debate here, some of us who uses mixers just want to be private, while there are groups that can take advantage of mixers. However, we've seen the ups and downs, when one mixers was seized, it open up a huge opportunity for other mixers to come into the picture and take a slice on that big pie.
There is an endless discussion that involes freedom of speech and freedom of privacy. Mixers are good but can be used by criminals and North Korean hackers. Is "bad people use it" enough to prevent actual privacy seekers? I for one would like for mixers to continue to exist, and in a utopian way, only be used by good people.
Seems like Lazarus group is a root cause of all mixer seizures recent years. Seems like Lazarus group is a favorite target of many governments and authorities so that if any mixer is used by Lazarus group, it will be automatically put in a black list of governments, authorities and will be in list of seizure attempts from governments.The quote is interesting but it is true. Recent weeks, there is a lawsuit about Tornado Cash. A source code, a service is considered as a criminal tool but is it true by laws.
There are two kinds of people in life,
Those who say that mixing is a right,
And those who don't.
Those who say that mixing is a right,
And those who don't.
Mixer exist to enhance the privacy but most of the people use it for launder money. So I do agree with you if the mixer provider can know wheter the transaction is coming from the hacker/dark activities or just want to secure their btc. But I think is hard to do so, from hack yes we can trace it and usually explorer like etherscan made label on it. But dark related activies i think still hard to find
Wait a minute, can you back up your statement that most people use mixers to launder money? If this is the case, then all mixers should already be shut down and seized by the authorities. But I don't agree with you. And I'm 100% sure that many who use mixers only want that their transactions can't be traced. And that's not laundering. To erase tracks is not to launder.
Anyway, I'm afraid that if mixers' main function becomes to clean dirty money, governments might declare war on them and we might end up mostly with centralized mixers, which isn't what anonymity and privacy are all about.
Mixer exist to enhance the privacy but most of the people use it for launder money. So I do agree with you if the mixer provider can know wheter the transaction is coming from the hacker/dark activities or just want to secure their btc. But I think is hard to do so, from hack yes we can trace it and usually explorer like etherscan made label on it. But dark related activies i think still hard to find
A complete discussion of the legality of mixers is like a perpetual mobile. If mixers were to check assets before mixing, then they would lose their status as an anonymization service. Again, if they allow all transactions, this automatically marks them as a money laundering service.
In fact, the whole process was failed by those who are supposed to prevent the theft of money, corruption, illegal trade and whatever.
It depends, actually. If all you want is anonimization onchain, which means I, Try Ninja, can't know the link between your address A and mixed address Z, then it doesn't matter if the mixer asks you for KYC or whatever. The mixer operator knows, but the outside public doesn't. In fact, the whole process was failed by those who are supposed to prevent the theft of money, corruption, illegal trade and whatever.
Basically why I view them as a service that comes goes -- a lot more often than custodial exchanges.
I'm afraid this trend will continue... since authorities focus a lot on the negative side, completely ignoring those who came for privacy. In addition, didn't some/a govt/s wanted for mixers to register? and most likely implement AML policies as well which essentially breaks the service.
Nevertheless, seeing how new ones are coming up probably means there is a demand for the service.
I'm afraid this trend will continue... since authorities focus a lot on the negative side, completely ignoring those who came for privacy. In addition, didn't some/a govt/s wanted for mixers to register? and most likely implement AML policies as well which essentially breaks the service.
Nevertheless, seeing how new ones are coming up probably means there is a demand for the service.
In my opinion, in the future we will see mixers that will refuse to mix coins from hacks or any other criminals activity.
It could be, but how fast they can identify a tainted vs untainted coins before they processed it?If mixers work this way just like what i have mentioned before on the same discussion when x mixer was seized. Then we will see little to no mixers getting shut.
There is an endless discussion that involes freedom of speech and freedom of privacy. Mixers are good but can be used by criminals and North Korean hackers. Is "bad people use it" enough to prevent actual privacy seekers? I for one would like for mixers to continue to exist, and in a utopian way, only be used by good people.
Maybe @FIODNederland can comment on it.
Maybe @FIODNederland can comment on it.
A complete discussion of the legality of mixers is like a perpetual mobile. If mixers were to check assets before mixing, then they would lose their status as an anonymization service. Again, if they allow all transactions, this automatically marks them as a money laundering service.
In fact, the whole process was failed by those who are supposed to prevent the theft of money, corruption, illegal trade and whatever.
In my opinion, in the future we will see mixers that will refuse to mix coins from hacks or any other criminals activity.
In order to achieve that, a high level of blockchain analytics is necessary, so they can automatically refuse coins from some addresses.
In order to achieve that, a high level of blockchain analytics is necessary, so they can automatically refuse coins from some addresses.
It could be, but how fast they can identify a tainted vs untainted coins before they processed it?
I mean for some of us we might be surprised if we see our coins being rejected because mixers deemed it like that, and without us really knowing the source then this could be a big problem for everyone.
As for the fate of mixers, just look at it's history, just saying.
Also short answer is that to escape the hammer of the authorities mixers may have to become an extension which can be used to track Bitcoin users. This doesn't provide full protection though.
This will just be like mixers working against what they are known for. I mean, in the course of providing anonymity, they now turn to privacy invaders.In my opinion, in the future we will see mixers that will refuse to mix coins from hacks or any other criminals activity.
In order to achieve that, a high level of blockchain analytics is necessary, so they can automatically refuse coins from some addresses.
This seems to be the only way to draw a balance between providing privacy and not working against the government. But by then, it will cost much to mix. The cost of complicated blockchain analysis will be added to the cost of mixing. In order to achieve that, a high level of blockchain analytics is necessary, so they can automatically refuse coins from some addresses.
As pointed out by LoyceV:
There is an endless discussion that involes freedom of speech and freedom of privacy. Mixers are good but can be used by criminals and North Korean hackers. Is "bad people use it" enough to prevent actual privacy seekers? I for one would like for mixers to continue to exist, and in a utopian way, only be used by good people.
Maybe @FIODNederland can comment on it.
There is an endless discussion that involes freedom of speech and freedom of privacy. Mixers are good but can be used by criminals and North Korean hackers. Is "bad people use it" enough to prevent actual privacy seekers? I for one would like for mixers to continue to exist, and in a utopian way, only be used by good people.
Maybe @FIODNederland can comment on it.
In my opinion, in the future we will see mixers that will refuse to mix coins from hacks or any other criminals activity.
In order to achieve that, a high level of blockchain analytics is necessary, so they can automatically refuse coins from some addresses.
In order to achieve that, a high level of blockchain analytics is necessary, so they can automatically refuse coins from some addresses.
Do the mixers actually know where transactions are coming from, maybe to not allow the transaction if it's from a criminal organisation. For instance, if Mr Bob wants to mix bitcoin he used to purchase arms in the darker, will Sinbad know that the particular coin is coming from dark net transactions?
This is possible with the right level of censorship and centralization. The government is basically tightening the noise of decentralization leaving only very little room for mixers to operate in an effort to ensure that they can track everything and no one stays off the radar.If No, it therefore means all mixers are vulnerable and can be taken down at anytime.
Short answer is yes.Also short answer is that to escape the hammer of the authorities mixers may have to become an extension which can be used to track Bitcoin users. This doesn't provide full protection though.
What is the fate of mixers in the cryptocurrency industry?
Mixers are often seen as bad players in the cryptocurrency industry. They can be taken down by FBI or other agencies at any time. The question is, why new mixers still coming to the industry?
For instance, in this recent Sinbad incidence, it is alleged that Sinbad committed many crimes as;
SEE my question,
Do the mixers actually know where transactions are coming from, maybe to not allow the transaction if it's from a criminal organisation. For instance, if Mr Bob wants to mix bitcoin he used to purchase arms in the darker, will Sinbad know that the particular coin is coming from dark net transactions? If No, it therefore means all mixers are vulnerable and can be taken down at anytime.
Mixers are often seen as bad players in the cryptocurrency industry. They can be taken down by FBI or other agencies at any time. The question is, why new mixers still coming to the industry?
For instance, in this recent Sinbad incidence, it is alleged that Sinbad committed many crimes as;
Quote
Sinbad processed funds from the hacks of Horizon Bridge and Axie Infinity, the release said. It's also moved funds tied to "sanctions evasion, drug trafficking, the purchase of child sexual abuse materials and additional illicit sales on darknet marketplaces."
Quote
Fellow analytics service Elliptic claimed Sinbad was also used to move some of the $35 million stolen from Atomic Wallet earlier this year.
SEE my question,
Do the mixers actually know where transactions are coming from, maybe to not allow the transaction if it's from a criminal organisation. For instance, if Mr Bob wants to mix bitcoin he used to purchase arms in the darker, will Sinbad know that the particular coin is coming from dark net transactions? If No, it therefore means all mixers are vulnerable and can be taken down at anytime.
Jump to: