[XC][XCurrency] Decentralised Trustless Privacy Platform / Encrypted XChat / Pos - page 1286.

I think everyone needs to chill out and let people work together.

Whatever his motives, Chapelin is giving his time to this product, and we should be grateful for that.

At this point, with very few transaction, by scrubbing addresses and matching transactions in/out, he can find an address tied to the wallet.

So trying to say he is wrong - is wrong.

I would imagine if we treated him with a little more respect, he would probably do the same in return.

Once transactions pick up, it may be a lot harder to track those transactions, but by using his method - whatever it be, he most likely would be able to match the transaction, or at least narrow it down.

if the sent matches the received, it most likely will be able to be flagged if not by the eye, by a piece of software.

LOVE SEEING THE FIRE IN YOU TODAY!!! FUCK THE DRK FUDDERS THIS COIN IS LEGIT AS FUCK!!!!

but the issue he is making a statement he can't back up and he is confused on how the software works so he is assuming something and if he is correct, I would like to see the proof otherwise it is FUD

the mixer doesn't use the multi-inputs from sender A to create the output to receiver B, if it does, he should be able to prove that

Mixer just use output of wallet.

And you can't deny.
this is multi input.
http://chainz.cryptoid.info/xc/tx.dws?96187.htm

Code:

{
"txid": "d867cc969fb58137b08f6e27a31bd8ec06d917c708da8f7bbf338113c4db374b",
"version": 1,
"time": 1402507194,
"locktime": 0,
"vin": [
{
"txid": "d2c432940715e034a0c51ef6360f5551f68566842bb2177ad9cc35900fadbb85",
"vout": 1,
"scriptSig": {
"asm": "304502205fff64a5d2c8f45fe2bc2042edc7558b5d71cb33f07149aeadf4a473942206ca022100ad744025f57fb45ead65cbd15c30a3aa3727aff0bca818688f42737442aee61801 0372cf8b94c9f0a695e7fa84dc1bfd3bd4f06692418932df8183a011420fb423f4",
"hex": "48304502205fff64a5d2c8f45fe2bc2042edc7558b5d71cb33f07149aeadf4a473942206ca022100ad744025f57fb45ead65cbd15c30a3aa3727aff0bca818688f42737442aee61801210372cf8b94c9f0a695e7fa84dc1bfd3bd4f06692418932df8183a011420fb423f4"
},
"sequence": 4294967295
},
{
"txid": "e2bbfdbfc87537bf9fff200bf69afe138d680698083950a2615058e2db4d2dbe",
"vout": 1,
"scriptSig": {
"asm": "3046022100816e12d0efd69b3c4d6d261edca6792018b474f695dbb752592bb09383446f9a022100c50e9a4181cbce3224a5c13723452f321ed92435a63ac9e51e26fe786393c0b301 02c7f176bab7585619f4336043a374b1f8e91a82a5b523804893ce082082369ff7",
"hex": "493046022100816e12d0efd69b3c4d6d261edca6792018b474f695dbb752592bb09383446f9a022100c50e9a4181cbce3224a5c13723452f321ed92435a63ac9e51e26fe786393c0b3012102c7f176bab7585619f4336043a374b1f8e91a82a5b523804893ce082082369ff7"
},
"sequence": 4294967295
},
{
"txid": "30b99d419299e152748972de73c575a4607b575af31a86212f94f2a6d3d8c8de",
"vout": 1,
"scriptSig": {
"asm": "3045022100f1dde262de444dbb858f535dfa6a02f5138a650f49471804b3922bd1e459095402203fbdc67f15cbf5af480122cee716f187f6a13ef9dc3a94a8cc96e42071066a6c01 0273005a58d884a74dba1c5ca13869e6686cf31b49020f50782446a2e975218e60",
"hex": "483045022100f1dde262de444dbb858f535dfa6a02f5138a650f49471804b3922bd1e459095402203fbdc67f15cbf5af480122cee716f187f6a13ef9dc3a94a8cc96e42071066a6c01210273005a58d884a74dba1c5ca13869e6686cf31b49020f50782446a2e975218e60"
},
"sequence": 4294967295
},
{
"txid": "028e3923ff80104c3502e62e08ecaebe1eb5911ef449ac87335246b7661854a9",
"vout": 0,
"scriptSig": {
"asm": "304502201cd635a9b8cee53f8b8f4dddeded06d42dbb4554cf7ba8d5dec6ce21d55f0323022100d8dbf2b8dbf8d8e0b2672231c6efb18321b0e0bb87c613ba087d3e0f3fc0ee5b01 024cb527cae06e1f0400c7c55bb41aebe82c32ed8f96a06616d7c6e9f0f50aec03",
"hex": "48304502201cd635a9b8cee53f8b8f4dddeded06d42dbb4554cf7ba8d5dec6ce21d55f0323022100d8dbf2b8dbf8d8e0b2672231c6efb18321b0e0bb87c613ba087d3e0f3fc0ee5b0121024cb527cae06e1f0400c7c55bb41aebe82c32ed8f96a06616d7c6e9f0f50aec03"
},
"sequence": 4294967295
},
{
"txid": "1f9a84f11ac5f1c8adf230a9e3c8ccb35413f6af30df0ad2bd0c7297d60d4f8a",
"vout": 1,
"scriptSig": {
"asm": "30450220225a82d94b1d5b7fa0a87a5ac944426b5891e087cf926bd5a65017a129bfdc090221009bd6a39951873394075ce3e33aeb6a1b62ee18fb4ac28e5241bb7d80ad307ab601 02cb2405732a6141d90080437de65646145400ae227b05b31a56c4461e9b54c241",
"hex": "4830450220225a82d94b1d5b7fa0a87a5ac944426b5891e087cf926bd5a65017a129bfdc090221009bd6a39951873394075ce3e33aeb6a1b62ee18fb4ac28e5241bb7d80ad307ab6012102cb2405732a6141d90080437de65646145400ae227b05b31a56c4461e9b54c241"
},
"sequence": 4294967295
},
{
"txid": "1f5a7a70bfe6dacbdc9bf6a24240eb8e3f877ea1df48bac0a911864bc63c7afc",
"vout": 2,
"scriptSig": {
"asm": "3046022100da094005f0a461f7d450a594a0f8a95edc54490182b29c24bd45c2d8ec8c20d4022100aeb0d31bdcc3faa29acf74d4f44b4676483d3da20185ad3c09f7c3ffb15ca4ad01 02c7f176bab7585619f4336043a374b1f8e91a82a5b523804893ce082082369ff7",
"hex": "493046022100da094005f0a461f7d450a594a0f8a95edc54490182b29c24bd45c2d8ec8c20d4022100aeb0d31bdcc3faa29acf74d4f44b4676483d3da20185ad3c09f7c3ffb15ca4ad012102c7f176bab7585619f4336043a374b1f8e91a82a5b523804893ce082082369ff7"
},
"sequence": 4294967295
},
{
"txid": "1d1ee242867c3da237f42d5351e8e12c37179b0392b4de225d55066ceeaabf81",
"vout": 1,
"scriptSig": {
"asm": "3046022100b50b01555d3398cfeb76c70dd70cc916d365e79ddf0443edfd63d0d410360738022100bf9d590f81d3eab7dcce53c776b3baa799f9d00e764d1cb32f3d9292027ae95c01 02cb2405732a6141d90080437de65646145400ae227b05b31a56c4461e9b54c241",
"hex": "493046022100b50b01555d3398cfeb76c70dd70cc916d365e79ddf0443edfd63d0d410360738022100bf9d590f81d3eab7dcce53c776b3baa799f9d00e764d1cb32f3d9292027ae95c012102cb2405732a6141d90080437de65646145400ae227b05b31a56c4461e9b54c241"
},
"sequence": 4294967295
},
{
"txid": "16139b9176aa83455efa1ecd94b0251c6582e24f21f01d9b141b0e4cd6b46196",
"vout": 1,
"scriptSig": {
"asm": "304402204d2571ad3a829ca7f022c860573d895a86caca5b6f55a04aa0a814bf24ce9cc202201c2a0fa57b978da5ee88396af109b450657fd7ecc14a2eded369c6a59d8c027f01 03e22697015787fce5f13a1ac364fbadd194c11290c4b4ad43ad707b0aeed93ca0",
"hex": "47304402204d2571ad3a829ca7f022c860573d895a86caca5b6f55a04aa0a814bf24ce9cc202201c2a0fa57b978da5ee88396af109b450657fd7ecc14a2eded369c6a59d8c027f012103e22697015787fce5f13a1ac364fbadd194c11290c4b4ad43ad707b0aeed93ca0"
},
"sequence": 4294967295
},
{
"txid": "fe5ad7f5737fccb49b299379635ca0eabe43a94b6298ebe39226c21aed5790e9",
"vout": 0,
"scriptSig": {
"asm": "304502206b98612dd33c9be9e55686b466daf9c230a9b58aa6db41186cc923e7d6c94c80022100f7c2525dedd05525b4b8ff1460d996d7fc84c1a10a50a614a099af9e9bad35d101 03533b791f2fcf5574a7ae7debe6f8bf23dbefd765689f4f775d0c32c78ba923e2",
"hex": "48304502206b98612dd33c9be9e55686b466daf9c230a9b58aa6db41186cc923e7d6c94c80022100f7c2525dedd05525b4b8ff1460d996d7fc84c1a10a50a614a099af9e9bad35d1012103533b791f2fcf5574a7ae7debe6f8bf23dbefd765689f4f775d0c32c78ba923e2"
},
"sequence": 4294967295
}
],
"vout": [
{
"value": 0.010269,
"n": 0,
"scriptPubKey": {
"asm": "OP_DUP OP_HASH160 71dc9f8fc83fae3381a9f53261aafd8894fec557 OP_EQUALVERIFY OP_CHECKSIG",
"hex": "76a91471dc9f8fc83fae3381a9f53261aafd8894fec55788ac",
"reqSigs": 1,
"type": "pubkeyhash",
"addresses": [
"XMjHVzkQZggy7SqhGdgBHjW5YWf9xpNwwX"
]
}
},
{
"value": 2.2,
"n": 1,
"scriptPubKey": {
"asm": "OP_DUP OP_HASH160 eb8fdb6499e414230e184779dcc578d984085f39 OP_EQUALVERIFY OP_CHECKSIG",
"hex": "76a914eb8fdb6499e414230e184779dcc578d984085f3988ac",
"reqSigs": 1,
"type": "pubkeyhash",
"addresses": [
"XYpmyasn9gRZuaumqjkk9XFccrz24XL2bk"
]
}
}
]
}

ballzdeep

full member

Activity: 193

Merit: 100

if the problem is low transaction amounts cant we all send some coin at same time same amount all over the place and dig in that pile ?

Artoodeetoo

hero member

Activity: 518

Merit: 500

I really don't see chaeplan as here to help, i think he is a paid drk troll, purely here for fud. Luckily we have a pto active dev who is on the forums and here to show him up.. Great job atc.. You have the drk boys very worried

the_game1224

sr. member

Activity: 252

Merit: 250

Quote from: sukottosan_d on June 11, 2014, 02:10:49 PM

I think everyone needs to chill out and let people work together.

Whatever his motives, Chapelin is giving his time to this product, and we should be grateful for that.

At this point, with very few transaction, by scrubbing addresses and matching transactions in/out, he can find an address tied to the wallet.

So trying to say he is wrong - is wrong.

I would imagine if we treated him with a little more respect, he would probably do the same in return.

Once transactions pick up, it may be a lot harder to track those transactions, but by using his method - whatever it be, he most likely would be able to match the transaction, or at least narrow it down.

if the sent matches the received, it most likely will be able to be flagged if not by the eye, by a piece of software.

What do you mean treat him with a little more respect? He has been asked multiple times to prove the senders address and link on the blockchain to which he cannot do and changes the subject. If he wants respect then all he needs to do is provide what ATC has requested

acseric

member

Activity: 112

Merit: 10

This argument is really confusing.
I see chaeplin making points...then people asking him to show them...but he is showing you.
I see no counter-explanation that shows he is incorrect, just people arguing with him who don't know what they are looking at. I see some attempt at it from atcsecure - but no real explanation of why what is happening is the correct behaviour and how it provides anonymity.

Do you guys have a whitepaper I can look at or something for the overall design?

Exactly. I work in tech, and it reminds me of when a hardcore developer tries to explain something to someone on the business side.

chaeplin

sr. member

Activity: 294

Merit: 250

Quote from: atcsecure on June 11, 2014, 02:08:06 PM

Quote from: chaeplin on June 11, 2014, 02:07:01 PM

Quote from: atcsecure on June 11, 2014, 02:04:22 PM

Quote from: atcsecure on June 11, 2014, 02:01:04 PM

Quote from: atcsecure on June 11, 2014, 01:58:49 PM

Quote from: atcsecure on June 11, 2014, 01:57:42 PM

Quote from: atcsecure on June 11, 2014, 01:44:03 PM

Quote from: atcsecure on June 11, 2014, 01:39:57 PM

Quote from: atcsecure on June 11, 2014, 01:32:59 PM

Quote from: atcsecure on June 11, 2014, 01:27:13 PM

Quote from: atcsecure on June 11, 2014, 02:09:20 PM

Really? Good to know.

Anyway, You want hard link, that two address of mixer are connected.
Right ?

yes

Then code is right. Sending to real payee works good.

Problem is received coins are reused.

Proof :

https://bitcointalksearch.org/topic/m.7254769

I have to prove two address is related.
XPpRHV6hWFDnQvNhu7WaRy6h6KfGkmx9Hb === XFY3XchgfA16dFv9pFVDTpCGg2q7TWUNtC

Right ?

ah but the received coins that are re-used at not from that transaction, it is from an earlier transaction through the mixer, so a different SENDER

Right. not from that transaction.

Used address by Mixer is related after all.

In this case, txs are fewer, so very clear.

It's related after 10 ~~ many blocks after.

So I call it flaw.

Ah, so there is no provable direct link

thank you

1FzikiCbBUM2YnatvHS9ufJtrUqkmuMD8s is mine.

okay show me the proof of link?

http://chainz.cryptoid.info/xc/tx.dws?96187.htm
http://chainz.cryptoid.info/xc/tx.dws?96160.htm

1FzikiCbBUM2YnatvHS9ufJtrUqkmuMD8s is mine.

the receivers address is

XV49MnmtTirtZSQ2jtgisvNhNr6DduzCNu

show the proof back to the original senders address

otherwise your spreading FUD

The bounty is still open until somebody proves the link...

Don't you understand this ?

I show you mixer address is related.

Want more ?

all your showing is the mixer address, the bounty is for showing a link from the original sender to the receiver address of XV49MnmtTirtZSQ2jtgisvNhNr6DduzCNu

of course you can trace back to the mixer from the receiver address, but prove the sender's address and link ON THE BLOCKCHAIN

Oh kiddding.

Sender --- a add of mixer -- b add of mixer -- payee.

It's in blockchain, a add of mixer == b add of mixer.

okay so prove it if you want the bounty - but prove the sender's address and link ON THE BLOCKCHAIN

Well I think you don't know anything about multi input.

It's used in a input together.

Ah, so you change topics when you can't prove the link from sender to receiver?

Quote

Input
An input is a reference to an output in a different transaction. Multiple inputs are often listed in a transaction.
The values of the referenced outputs are added up, and the total is usable in the outputs of this transaction.
Previous tx is a hash of a previous transaction. Index is the specific output in the referenced transaction. ScriptSig is the first half of a script (discussed in more detail later).

The script contains two components, a signature and a public key. The public key belongs to the redeemer of the output
transaction and proves the creator is allowed to redeem the outputs value. The other component is an ECDSA signature over
a hash of a simplified version of the transaction. It, combined with the public key, proves the transaction was created
by the real owner of the address in question.
Various flags define how the transaction is simplified and can be used to create different types of payment.

https://en.bitcoin.it/wiki/Transactions

Related. pass-through mixer.

sukottosan_d

member

Activity: 84

Merit: 10

This argument is really confusing.
I see chaeplin making points...then people asking him to show them...but he is showing you.
I see no counter-explanation that shows he is incorrect, just people arguing with him who don't know what they are looking at. I see some attempt at it from atcsecure - but no real explanation of why what is happening is the correct behaviour and how it provides anonymity.

Do you guys have a whitepaper I can look at or something for the overall design?

lnash

member

Activity: 73

Merit: 10

Cryptogretzky, Dadon, DRRobert, Wevus, Evtrmm, Mikemikemike, Jestersdead, Greyskies, 520bit, Jasinlee, Teka, Pizpie and anyone else interested:

Huge differentiator XC MOBILE APP has been created (Android and IPhone) but not released
- quick mobile transfer
- balance checks
- full control over keys
- advanced QR code scanner
- mixer support coming

If we want to do an exclusive launch with XC - message me in our IRC channel #XCofficial - I'm there as Alliance.

I spoke with the mobile app developer and he sees the potential in XC, likes the community, and may do it for a XC bounty.
He was originally looking to do the launch with a different coin; however, if we can get in there quickly, it's ours.

phosphorush

hero member

Activity: 503

Merit: 500

he did change the subject and didn't provide the proof Cheesy

atcsecure

hero member

Activity: 756

Merit: 500

I think everyone needs to chill out and let people work together.

Whatever his motives, Chapelin is giving his time to this product, and we should be grateful for that.

At this point, with very few transaction, by scrubbing addresses and matching transactions in/out, he can find an address tied to the wallet.

So trying to say he is wrong - is wrong.

I would imagine if we treated him with a little more respect, he would probably do the same in return.

Once transactions pick up, it may be a lot harder to track those transactions, but by using his method - whatever it be, he most likely would be able to match the transaction, or at least narrow it down.

if the sent matches the received, it most likely will be able to be flagged if not by the eye, by a piece of software.

but the issue he is making a statement he can't back up and he is confused on how the software works so he is assuming something and if he is correct, I would like to see the proof otherwise it is FUD

the mixer doesn't use the multi-inputs from sender A to create the output to receiver B, if it does, he should be able to prove that

atcsecure

hero member

Activity: 756

Merit: 500

Quote from: chaeplin on June 11, 2014, 02:07:01 PM

I think everyone needs to chill out and let people work together.

Whatever his motives, Chapelin is giving his time to this product, and we should be grateful for that.

At this point, with very few transaction, by scrubbing addresses and matching transactions in/out, he can find an address tied to the wallet.

So trying to say he is wrong - is wrong.

I would imagine if we treated him with a little more respect, he would probably do the same in return.

Once transactions pick up, it may be a lot harder to track those transactions, but by using his method - whatever it be, he most likely would be able to match the transaction, or at least narrow it down.

if the sent matches the received, it most likely will be able to be flagged if not by the eye, by a piece of software.

but the issue he is making a statement he can't back up and he is confused on how the software works so he is assuming something and if he is correct, I would like to see the proof otherwise it is FUD

evtrmm

sr. member

Activity: 392

Merit: 250

So much for "Community"

I think everyone needs to chill out and let people work together.

Whatever his motives, Chapelin is giving his time to this product, and we should be grateful for that.

At this point, with very few transaction, by scrubbing addresses and matching transactions in/out, he can find an address tied to the wallet.

So trying to say he is wrong - is wrong.

I would imagine if we treated him with a little more respect, he would probably do the same in return.

Once transactions pick up, it may be a lot harder to track those transactions, but by using his method - whatever it be, he most likely would be able to match the transaction, or at least narrow it down.

if the sent matches the received, it most likely will be able to be flagged if not by the eye, by a piece of software.

atcsecure

hero member

Activity: 756

Merit: 500

Quote from: atcsecure on June 11, 2014, 02:04:22 PM

Quote from: atcsecure on June 11, 2014, 02:01:04 PM

Quote from: atcsecure on June 11, 2014, 01:58:49 PM

Quote from: atcsecure on June 11, 2014, 01:57:42 PM

Quote from: atcsecure on June 11, 2014, 01:44:03 PM

Quote from: atcsecure on June 11, 2014, 01:39:57 PM

Quote from: atcsecure on June 11, 2014, 01:32:59 PM

Quote from: atcsecure on June 11, 2014, 01:27:13 PM

Quote from: atcsecure on June 11, 2014, 02:04:22 PM

Really? Good to know.

Anyway, You want hard link, that two address of mixer are connected.
Right ?

yes

Then code is right. Sending to real payee works good.

Problem is received coins are reused.

Proof :

https://bitcointalksearch.org/topic/m.7254769

I have to prove two address is related.
XPpRHV6hWFDnQvNhu7WaRy6h6KfGkmx9Hb === XFY3XchgfA16dFv9pFVDTpCGg2q7TWUNtC

Right ?

ah but the received coins that are re-used at not from that transaction, it is from an earlier transaction through the mixer, so a different SENDER

Right. not from that transaction.

Used address by Mixer is related after all.

In this case, txs are fewer, so very clear.

It's related after 10 ~~ many blocks after.

So I call it flaw.

Ah, so there is no provable direct link

thank you

1FzikiCbBUM2YnatvHS9ufJtrUqkmuMD8s is mine.

okay show me the proof of link?

http://chainz.cryptoid.info/xc/tx.dws?96187.htm
http://chainz.cryptoid.info/xc/tx.dws?96160.htm

1FzikiCbBUM2YnatvHS9ufJtrUqkmuMD8s is mine.

the receivers address is

XV49MnmtTirtZSQ2jtgisvNhNr6DduzCNu

show the proof back to the original senders address

otherwise your spreading FUD

The bounty is still open until somebody proves the link...

Don't you understand this ?

I show you mixer address is related.

Want more ?

all your showing is the mixer address, the bounty is for showing a link from the original sender to the receiver address of XV49MnmtTirtZSQ2jtgisvNhNr6DduzCNu

of course you can trace back to the mixer from the receiver address, but prove the sender's address and link ON THE BLOCKCHAIN

Oh kiddding.

Sender --- a add of mixer -- b add of mixer -- payee.

It's in blockchain, a add of mixer == b add of mixer.

okay so prove it if you want the bounty - but prove the sender's address and link ON THE BLOCKCHAIN

Well I think you don't know anything about multi input.

It's used in a input together.

Ah, so you change topics when you can't prove the link from sender to receiver?

chaeplin

sr. member

Activity: 294

Merit: 250

Quote from: atcsecure on June 11, 2014, 02:01:04 PM

Quote from: atcsecure on June 11, 2014, 01:58:49 PM

Quote from: atcsecure on June 11, 2014, 01:57:42 PM

Quote from: atcsecure on June 11, 2014, 01:44:03 PM

Quote from: atcsecure on June 11, 2014, 01:39:57 PM

Quote from: atcsecure on June 11, 2014, 01:32:59 PM

Quote from: atcsecure on June 11, 2014, 01:27:13 PM

Really? Good to know.

Anyway, You want hard link, that two address of mixer are connected.
Right ?

yes

Then code is right. Sending to real payee works good.

Problem is received coins are reused.

Proof :

https://bitcointalksearch.org/topic/m.7254769

I have to prove two address is related.
XPpRHV6hWFDnQvNhu7WaRy6h6KfGkmx9Hb === XFY3XchgfA16dFv9pFVDTpCGg2q7TWUNtC

Right ?

ah but the received coins that are re-used at not from that transaction, it is from an earlier transaction through the mixer, so a different SENDER

Right. not from that transaction.

Used address by Mixer is related after all.

In this case, txs are fewer, so very clear.

It's related after 10 ~~ many blocks after.

So I call it flaw.

Ah, so there is no provable direct link

thank you

1FzikiCbBUM2YnatvHS9ufJtrUqkmuMD8s is mine.

okay show me the proof of link?

http://chainz.cryptoid.info/xc/tx.dws?96187.htm
http://chainz.cryptoid.info/xc/tx.dws?96160.htm

1FzikiCbBUM2YnatvHS9ufJtrUqkmuMD8s is mine.

the receivers address is

XV49MnmtTirtZSQ2jtgisvNhNr6DduzCNu

show the proof back to the original senders address

otherwise your spreading FUD

The bounty is still open until somebody proves the link...

Don't you understand this ?

I show you mixer address is related.

Want more ?

all your showing is the mixer address, the bounty is for showing a link from the original sender to the receiver address of XV49MnmtTirtZSQ2jtgisvNhNr6DduzCNu

of course you can trace back to the mixer from the receiver address, but prove the sender's address and link ON THE BLOCKCHAIN

Oh kiddding.

Sender --- a add of mixer -- b add of mixer -- payee.

It's in blockchain, a add of mixer == b add of mixer.

okay so prove it if you want the bounty - but prove the sender's address and link ON THE BLOCKCHAIN

Well I think you don't know anything about multi input.

It's used in a input together.

atcsecure

hero member

Activity: 756

Merit: 500

Quote from: atcsecure on June 11, 2014, 02:01:04 PM

Quote from: atcsecure on June 11, 2014, 01:58:49 PM

Quote from: atcsecure on June 11, 2014, 01:57:42 PM

Quote from: atcsecure on June 11, 2014, 01:44:03 PM

Quote from: atcsecure on June 11, 2014, 01:39:57 PM

Quote from: atcsecure on June 11, 2014, 01:32:59 PM

Quote from: atcsecure on June 11, 2014, 01:27:13 PM

Quote from: atcsecure on June 11, 2014, 02:01:04 PM

Really? Good to know.

Anyway, You want hard link, that two address of mixer are connected.
Right ?

yes

Then code is right. Sending to real payee works good.

Problem is received coins are reused.

Proof :

https://bitcointalksearch.org/topic/m.7254769

I have to prove two address is related.
XPpRHV6hWFDnQvNhu7WaRy6h6KfGkmx9Hb === XFY3XchgfA16dFv9pFVDTpCGg2q7TWUNtC

Right ?

ah but the received coins that are re-used at not from that transaction, it is from an earlier transaction through the mixer, so a different SENDER

Right. not from that transaction.

Used address by Mixer is related after all.

In this case, txs are fewer, so very clear.

It's related after 10 ~~ many blocks after.

So I call it flaw.

Ah, so there is no provable direct link

thank you

1FzikiCbBUM2YnatvHS9ufJtrUqkmuMD8s is mine.

okay show me the proof of link?

http://chainz.cryptoid.info/xc/tx.dws?96187.htm
http://chainz.cryptoid.info/xc/tx.dws?96160.htm

1FzikiCbBUM2YnatvHS9ufJtrUqkmuMD8s is mine.

the receivers address is

XV49MnmtTirtZSQ2jtgisvNhNr6DduzCNu

show the proof back to the original senders address

otherwise your spreading FUD

The bounty is still open until somebody proves the link...

Don't you understand this ?

I show you mixer address is related.

Want more ?

all your showing is the mixer address, the bounty is for showing a link from the original sender to the receiver address of XV49MnmtTirtZSQ2jtgisvNhNr6DduzCNu

of course you can trace back to the mixer from the receiver address, but prove the sender's address and link ON THE BLOCKCHAIN

Oh kiddding.

Sender --- a add of mixer -- b add of mixer -- payee.

It's in blockchain, a add of mixer == b add of mixer.

okay so prove it if you want the bounty - but prove the sender's address and link ON THE BLOCKCHAIN

chaeplin

sr. member

Activity: 294

Merit: 250

Quote from: atcsecure on June 11, 2014, 01:58:49 PM

Quote from: atcsecure on June 11, 2014, 01:57:42 PM

Quote from: atcsecure on June 11, 2014, 01:44:03 PM

Quote from: atcsecure on June 11, 2014, 01:39:57 PM

Quote from: atcsecure on June 11, 2014, 01:32:59 PM

Quote from: atcsecure on June 11, 2014, 01:27:13 PM

Really? Good to know.

Anyway, You want hard link, that two address of mixer are connected.
Right ?

yes

Then code is right. Sending to real payee works good.

Problem is received coins are reused.

Proof :

https://bitcointalksearch.org/topic/m.7254769

I have to prove two address is related.
XPpRHV6hWFDnQvNhu7WaRy6h6KfGkmx9Hb === XFY3XchgfA16dFv9pFVDTpCGg2q7TWUNtC

Right ?

ah but the received coins that are re-used at not from that transaction, it is from an earlier transaction through the mixer, so a different SENDER

Right. not from that transaction.

Used address by Mixer is related after all.

In this case, txs are fewer, so very clear.

It's related after 10 ~~ many blocks after.

So I call it flaw.

Ah, so there is no provable direct link

thank you

1FzikiCbBUM2YnatvHS9ufJtrUqkmuMD8s is mine.

okay show me the proof of link?

http://chainz.cryptoid.info/xc/tx.dws?96187.htm
http://chainz.cryptoid.info/xc/tx.dws?96160.htm

1FzikiCbBUM2YnatvHS9ufJtrUqkmuMD8s is mine.

the receivers address is

XV49MnmtTirtZSQ2jtgisvNhNr6DduzCNu

show the proof back to the original senders address

otherwise your spreading FUD

The bounty is still open until somebody proves the link...

Don't you understand this ?

I show you mixer address is related.

Want more ?

all your showing is the mixer address, the bounty is for showing a link from the original sender to the receiver address of XV49MnmtTirtZSQ2jtgisvNhNr6DduzCNu

of course you can trace back to the mixer from the receiver address, but prove the sender's address and link ON THE BLOCKCHAIN

Oh kiddding.

Sender --- a add of mixer -- b add of mixer -- payee.

It's in blockchain, a add of mixer == b add of mixer.

Waht did you say ??

Code:

I have to prove two address is related.
XPpRHV6hWFDnQvNhu7WaRy6h6KfGkmx9Hb === XFY3XchgfA16dFv9pFVDTpCGg2q7TWUNtC

Right ?

Code:

ah but the received coins that are re-used at not from that transaction, it is from an earlier transaction through the mixer, so a different SENDER

atcsecure

hero member

Activity: 756

Merit: 500

Quote from: atcsecure on June 11, 2014, 01:58:49 PM

Quote from: atcsecure on June 11, 2014, 01:57:42 PM

Quote from: atcsecure on June 11, 2014, 01:44:03 PM

Quote from: atcsecure on June 11, 2014, 01:39:57 PM

Quote from: atcsecure on June 11, 2014, 01:32:59 PM

Quote from: atcsecure on June 11, 2014, 01:27:13 PM

Quote from: atcsecure on June 11, 2014, 01:58:49 PM

Really? Good to know.

Anyway, You want hard link, that two address of mixer are connected.
Right ?

yes

Then code is right. Sending to real payee works good.

Problem is received coins are reused.

Proof :

https://bitcointalksearch.org/topic/m.7254769

I have to prove two address is related.
XPpRHV6hWFDnQvNhu7WaRy6h6KfGkmx9Hb === XFY3XchgfA16dFv9pFVDTpCGg2q7TWUNtC

Right ?

ah but the received coins that are re-used at not from that transaction, it is from an earlier transaction through the mixer, so a different SENDER

Right. not from that transaction.

Used address by Mixer is related after all.

In this case, txs are fewer, so very clear.

It's related after 10 ~~ many blocks after.

So I call it flaw.

Ah, so there is no provable direct link

thank you

1FzikiCbBUM2YnatvHS9ufJtrUqkmuMD8s is mine.

okay show me the proof of link?

http://chainz.cryptoid.info/xc/tx.dws?96187.htm
http://chainz.cryptoid.info/xc/tx.dws?96160.htm

1FzikiCbBUM2YnatvHS9ufJtrUqkmuMD8s is mine.

the receivers address is

XV49MnmtTirtZSQ2jtgisvNhNr6DduzCNu

show the proof back to the original senders address

otherwise your spreading FUD

The bounty is still open until somebody proves the link...

Don't you understand this ?

I show you mixer address is related.

Want more ?

all your showing is the mixer address, the bounty is for showing a link from the original sender to the receiver address of XV49MnmtTirtZSQ2jtgisvNhNr6DduzCNu

of course you can trace back to the mixer from the receiver address, but prove the sender's address and link ON THE BLOCKCHAIN

chaeplin

sr. member

Activity: 294

Merit: 250

Quote from: atcsecure on June 11, 2014, 01:57:42 PM

Quote from: atcsecure on June 11, 2014, 01:44:03 PM

Quote from: atcsecure on June 11, 2014, 01:39:57 PM

Quote from: atcsecure on June 11, 2014, 01:32:59 PM

Quote from: atcsecure on June 11, 2014, 01:27:13 PM

Quote from: atcsecure on June 11, 2014, 01:57:42 PM

Really? Good to know.

Anyway, You want hard link, that two address of mixer are connected.
Right ?

yes

Then code is right. Sending to real payee works good.

Problem is received coins are reused.

Proof :

https://bitcointalksearch.org/topic/m.7254769

I have to prove two address is related.
XPpRHV6hWFDnQvNhu7WaRy6h6KfGkmx9Hb === XFY3XchgfA16dFv9pFVDTpCGg2q7TWUNtC

Right ?

ah but the received coins that are re-used at not from that transaction, it is from an earlier transaction through the mixer, so a different SENDER

Right. not from that transaction.

Used address by Mixer is related after all.

In this case, txs are fewer, so very clear.

It's related after 10 ~~ many blocks after.

So I call it flaw.

Ah, so there is no provable direct link

thank you

1FzikiCbBUM2YnatvHS9ufJtrUqkmuMD8s is mine.

okay show me the proof of link?

http://chainz.cryptoid.info/xc/tx.dws?96187.htm
http://chainz.cryptoid.info/xc/tx.dws?96160.htm

1FzikiCbBUM2YnatvHS9ufJtrUqkmuMD8s is mine.

the receivers address is

XV49MnmtTirtZSQ2jtgisvNhNr6DduzCNu

show the proof back to the original senders address

otherwise your spreading FUD

The bounty is still open until somebody proves the link...

Don't you understand this ?

I show you mixer address is related.

Want more ?

atcsecure

hero member

Activity: 756

Merit: 500

Quote from: atcsecure on June 11, 2014, 01:44:03 PM

Quote from: atcsecure on June 11, 2014, 01:39:57 PM

Quote from: atcsecure on June 11, 2014, 01:32:59 PM

Quote from: atcsecure on June 11, 2014, 01:27:13 PM

Really? Good to know.

Anyway, You want hard link, that two address of mixer are connected.
Right ?

yes

Then code is right. Sending to real payee works good.

Problem is received coins are reused.

Proof :

https://bitcointalksearch.org/topic/m.7254769

I have to prove two address is related.
XPpRHV6hWFDnQvNhu7WaRy6h6KfGkmx9Hb === XFY3XchgfA16dFv9pFVDTpCGg2q7TWUNtC

Right ?

ah but the received coins that are re-used at not from that transaction, it is from an earlier transaction through the mixer, so a different SENDER

Right. not from that transaction.

Used address by Mixer is related after all.

In this case, txs are fewer, so very clear.

It's related after 10 ~~ many blocks after.

So I call it flaw.

Ah, so there is no provable direct link

thank you

1FzikiCbBUM2YnatvHS9ufJtrUqkmuMD8s is mine.

okay show me the proof of link?

http://chainz.cryptoid.info/xc/tx.dws?96187.htm
http://chainz.cryptoid.info/xc/tx.dws?96160.htm

1FzikiCbBUM2YnatvHS9ufJtrUqkmuMD8s is mine.

the receivers address is

XV49MnmtTirtZSQ2jtgisvNhNr6DduzCNu

show the proof back to the original senders address

otherwise your spreading FUD

The bounty is still open until somebody proves the link...

atcsecure

hero member

Activity: 756

Merit: 500

Quote from: atcsecure on June 11, 2014, 01:44:03 PM

Quote from: atcsecure on June 11, 2014, 01:39:57 PM

Quote from: atcsecure on June 11, 2014, 01:32:59 PM

Quote from: atcsecure on June 11, 2014, 01:27:13 PM