Pages:
Author

Topic: Your options to having privacy in Bitcoin - and their tradeoffs (Read 484 times)

sr. member
Activity: 658
Merit: 354
I stand with Ukraine!
BlackHatCoiner.

You made a typo in your topic. Samourai wallet, not Samurai wallet.

You add an url link to a website of Samourai wallet but if any reader does not click on the link but typing it manually on a browser, it will lead to another website which can be a phishing site.
legendary
Activity: 3724
Merit: 3063
Leave no FUD unchallenged
but just like other idiots who  promote buying blockreward sats(so called rare) for foolish things like BRC tokens.. here is an idea..
make a deal with mining pool that you will create a TX to spend dirty coin to a address where the receiving address is 0sat but the fee is 100% and only broadcast to the mining pool. thus destroying the UTXO of dirty coin completely and having no output to continue any taint..
the pool then after adding it to blockchain (thus claiming the utxo as fee) will then (using a separate reward from an earlier block) pay out an agreed amount to an address you want. thus you appear as just a legit miner receiving share of reward
thus destroying all taint of dirty coin at same time

Sounds like rank hypocrisy coming from the same user who said this:

breaking the tracking/accounting of bitcoin breaks bitcoins utility as money/currency/asset. just for the selfish whims of shady people that are too lazy to think about how they personally should hide their activities and instead want other services/projects to do the hiding for their lazy asses

Also, if when making this deal with the mining pool, there was any sort of remuneration for them, you would also have to repeat your previous arguments about them having to register as money transmitters:

regulators are already creating crypto laws where anyone facilitating the funds transfer of other people for a payment/commission is to be deemed as a money transmitter/money service business.

Or do these arguments only apply when the topic is about LN?  I forget how these subjective rules of yours apply sometimes.  There doesn't seem to be much consistency to it.  Just feels like layers upon layers of hypocrisy.
legendary
Activity: 1512
Merit: 7340
Farewell, Leo
make a deal with mining pool that you will create a TX to spend dirty coin to a address where the receiving address is 0sat but the fee is 100% and only broadcast to the mining pool.
That implies you're buying the term "tainted coins". This thread has nothing to do with this. Wanting privacy doesn't mean wanting to pass the made-up "legitimate coin test" from chain analysis companies.

And also, tainted coins are completely subjectively interpreted. A "tainted coin" can be a block reward, because the miner used "tainted coins" to earn the transaction fees. "Tainted coins" are only destroyed if you don't buy them as concept.
legendary
Activity: 4214
Merit: 4458
shhhhh dont tell this to the idiots of the doomad clan..(blackhatcoiner, oeleo and other cult followers)

but just like other idiots who  promote buying blockreward sats(so called rare) for foolish things like BRC tokens.. here is an idea..
make a deal with mining pool that you will create a TX to spend dirty coin to a address where the receiving address is 0sat but the fee is 100% and only broadcast to the mining pool. thus destroying the UTXO of dirty coin completely and having no output to continue any taint..
the pool then after adding it to blockchain (thus claiming the utxo as fee) will then (using a separate reward from an earlier block) pay out an agreed amount to an address you want. thus you appear as just a legit miner receiving share of reward
thus destroying all taint of dirty coin at same time

buying reward sats is not deemed mixing and instead can be seen as just buying rare sats

i tried to give many hints over months about ways around the concern of mixer legitimacy and how to get around it.. but it seems a certain clan group couldnt put 1 and 1 together to get 2

yep bitcoin has had the ability to destroy UTXO and generate fresh coin with zero taint since day one... use it
legendary
Activity: 1512
Merit: 7340
Farewell, Leo
Hi, I just post this thread 'Can Submarine Swaps in Lightning Wallet increase Bitcoin Privacy?'

https://bitcointalksearch.org/topic/can-submarine-swaps-in-lightning-wallet-increase-bitcoin-privacy-5464525
I did post a reply in your thread. I wouldn't recommend doing that, but it can be helpful with toxic change. For instance, when you want to mix 10.4 mBTC, you can mix the 10 mBTC, and exchange the 0.4 mBTC for 0.4 LN-mBTC via submarine swap.

If you want to do this centralized way, better use the non kyc exchanges to send the bitcoin and withdraw in chucks in different btc addresses.
Or just use a centralized mixer, as it'll do it more effectively and cheaply.

What's the point of using a centralized site when you're having an option to choose the other way?
Effectiveness and cost. It appears to be the case frequently, that a centralized mixer can charge absolutely zero, and be even more effective than coinjoins, as your inputs will hold no blockchain connection with the outputs.

Forget to mention it's not really applicable to Wasabi wallet (and any wallet which use BIP 157) where the wallet can obtain relevant transaction from full node without full node knowing which transaction is needed by the wallet.
Correct. Wasabi uses block filtering, so there is no privacy invaded as in regular light clients. I've edited my post.
hero member
Activity: 770
Merit: 556
I would not recommend this method at all because this is the most risky. Although some casinos may let you deposit and withdraw without KYC but they will never let you withdraw unless or until you wager the whole balance. So now you have to first gamble the money, and you can lose everything in the process.

If you want to do this centralized way, better use the non kyc exchanges to send the bitcoin and withdraw in chucks in different btc addresses. Although a less effective method as compared to the methods listed in OP but still at least does not have a risk of losing money like in a casino.
When we're talk about privacy matter, we must avoid centralization as much as possible. What's the point of using a centralized site when you're having an option to choose the other way?

Not sure what's site you refer about centralized no KYC exchange, but my thought is Binance when they were still allow maximum of 2 BTC withdraw without KYC. Remember Binance has a KYC mandatory rule and able to freeze your coins.

Either centralized casino or centralized exchange, both of them are bad choice for privacy.
legendary
Activity: 2954
Merit: 1159
Great thread @BlackHatCoiner! ....

I just want to know if you see the anonymous (decentralized) casinos as another method to secure your financial privacy? There are still some casinos out there that supports pseudo anonymity, but I will not push large amounts of coins through them.

People can still "mix" their coins through these casinos, until they start asking for KYC verification. Just make sure these casinos are not scams and that you can actually withdraw from them. (They start with no KYC requirements, but eventually bend the knee to law enforcement)  Roll Eyes

I would not recommend this method at all because this is the most risky. Although some casinos may let you deposit and withdraw without KYC but they will never let you withdraw unless or until you wager the whole balance. So now you have to first gamble the money, and you can lose everything in the process.

If you want to do this centralized way, better use the non kyc exchanges to send the bitcoin and withdraw in chucks in different btc addresses. Although a less effective method as compared to the methods listed in OP but still at least does not have a risk of losing money like in a casino.
newbie
Activity: 23
Merit: 7
Due to recent events with mixer being confiscated by authorities, or mixer doing an exit scam, or with a seemingly legitimate pro-privacy company going in the opposite direction, I think a clarification of where we are at the moment in protecting the users' privacy is necessary.

There are three ways to secure privacy of your bitcoins, each of which comes with its own advantages and disadvantages. Pick according to what fits you best.
It absolutely does. Any sane user of a privacy service does not want the fee they pay being handed to blockchain analysis to spy on their inputs and potentially censor those inputs based on their findings. This is antithetical to the entire concept of privacy.

Hi, I just post this thread 'Can Submarine Swaps in Lightning Wallet increase Bitcoin Privacy?'

https://bitcointalksearch.org/topic/can-submarine-swaps-in-lightning-wallet-increase-bitcoin-privacy-5464525

What do you think, could this be the 4th option to improve Bitcoin anonymity ?
sr. member
Activity: 322
Merit: 306
Farewell LEO o_e_l_e_o
Wow... Informative.

Privacy security is the first thing to look for in bitcoin. Protecting privacy is the responsibility of each. I always try to do it. All three are good options even though the mixer service option is often associated with illegal activity. The third option offered is good to be used as a step in securing privacy.

A_MP
legendary
Activity: 3724
Merit: 3063
Leave no FUD unchallenged
Well, I want to keep this free of personal complains and as much objective and on-the-point as possible. What the default coordinator does with the money it makes isn't important for the coinjoin user
Sure, but it is an objective fact that Wasabi use the fees you pay them to pay blockchain analysis companies for information about your UTXOs. And I would argue that is incredibly important for the coinjoin user.

If a 'honeypot' is a site or service that covertly passes your personal data on to governments, is a company that does it openly an 'overt honeypot'?  Or is there a better name for it?  Wasabi are giving your details to blockchain analysis firms and those companies are likely passing the details over to law enforcement or other government agencies.
legendary
Activity: 1512
Merit: 7340
Farewell, Leo
IMO it's also worth to mention user is required to have Bitcoin Core running (either full or pruned node) which require user to download 500GB+ of blockchain.
Although you can run Whirlpool without a full node, it's not recommended. Any time you are not connected to your own full node, you are sharing data with a third party. Anyone who is in any way serious about their privacy should be running their own node already.
Edited. I think that's enough:

Running your own full node is a requirement. (even though you should either way do that, as noted below)
Note: To enjoy great levels of privacy with coinjoin, running your own full node is a prerequisite. If viewing your wallet's balance requires a third party, then the gained privacy is questionable.



Just spotted the mistake in the name of the website. It should be samouraiwallet.com, not samurai.com.
My bad. Just corrected it.

Brilliant post. Let me just say that JoinMarket has a nice GUI (Jam) and is really easy to use. You can run it on your own node too.
You have to run it on your own node. It's required. Joinmarket is a software that works with RPC, communicating with your Bitcoin client, you can't connect to a client you don't control of, and neither should you. As for Jam, while I've tried it, I think it lacks some features yet, and it's still in beta so I wouldn't trust it with huge amounts.
sr. member
Activity: 406
Merit: 896
Brilliant post. Let me just say that JoinMarket has a nice GUI (Jam) and is really easy to use. You can run it on your own node too.
legendary
Activity: 2268
Merit: 18509
IMO it's also worth to mention user is required to have Bitcoin Core running (either full or pruned node) which require user to download 500GB+ of blockchain.
Although you can run Whirlpool without a full node, it's not recommended. Any time you are not connected to your own full node, you are sharing data with a third party. Anyone who is in any way serious about their privacy should be running their own node already.

Just spotted the mistake in the name of the website. It should be samouraiwallet.com, not samurai.com.

I have added - "Funds blockchain analysis company and requests permission from them when user does coinjoin.". I don't believe there's anything more to say.
That seems completely fair. That is a simple statement of fact which any serious user would want to know.
legendary
Activity: 1512
Merit: 7340
Farewell, Leo
I would love if you could have created some infographics to make it easier to understand instead of reading the whole post, I still appreciate the post though.
I'm struggling to imagine how I could do that without seeming affiliated to a service.

I just want to know if you see the anonymous (decentralized) casinos as another method to secure your financial privacy?
Well, no. Just as with centralized exchanges, services which subsequently tumble your bitcoin wouldn't fall in the "Mixer services" category, in my opinion. If you want to go a la mixer, then use a mixer. Internet services listed are specifically created for that purpose. Don't exchange / gamble coins thinking that the outcome will be the same.

Absolutely agree, but my point is the size of the total liquidity pool is not that relevant because nobody is mixing with every other output in the pool.
I removed anonymity set from both Joinmarket and Whirlpool. It's misleading and not important to begin with; both are very effective. From that point on, it depends on how many remixes you'll do.

This is antithetical to the entire concept of privacy.
It is, indeed. I have added - "Funds blockchain analysis company and requests permission from them when user does coinjoin.". I don't believe there's anything more to say.

Apart from price fluctuations, the process itself has some additional costs.
The other disadvantage I can think of is the complication of this method.
Added both.
legendary
Activity: 3444
Merit: 10537
3. Swapping bitcoin with a private cryptocurrency
cons:
  • You're giving up bitcoin for an altcoin. Some may not like that, and if you keep it for a lot of time, there might be price fluctuations (which can be seen as an advantage too, as they randomize the swapped bitcoin amount).
Apart from price fluctuations, the process itself has some additional costs.
One cost is the network fees you have to pay to create transactions in bitcoin and monero networks that can add up.
The other cost is the exchange fee you have to pay the platform like Bisq that you are using.
The last cost I can think of is the spread. Sometimes if the trading volume is low, there is a spread in the orderbooks between the top sell order and the top buy order. So even if price remains the same and you buy that altcoin and sell it immediately you still lose some money because of the spread.

The other disadvantage I can think of is the complication of this method. Someone who has never used Bisq before or have monero wallet/used monero will have to learn how to do these things first which is time consuming and could be difficult for some people.
legendary
Activity: 2268
Merit: 18509
But what ultimately matters when remixing is the new coins that come in. If you do a coinjoin with all inputs remixed, then it won't make a difference. Also, it makes yourself more untraceable to be in a coinjoin with 100 inputs, than in one with 5, so the number of inputs used surely matters.
Absolutely agree, but my point is the size of the total liquidity pool is not that relevant because nobody is mixing with every other output in the pool. Whether the total liquidity is 5 BTC or 500,000 BTC, it doesn't make a difference if I only coinjoin with 0.5 BTC of it.

So let's say JoinMarket has ~700 BTC in liquidity and Whirlpool has ~8,500. I have 0.5 BTC to coinjoin in each one. For JoinMarket, I perform a single coinjoin with 19 other participants. For Whirlpool, I perform a single coinjoin with 4 other participants. At this point, my anonymity set is greater for the JoinMarket, even though Whirlpool has the greater overall liquidity. But then I leave my coinjoined output in Whirlpool and it gets another 5 free remixes. Now my Whirlpool anonymity set is exponentially larger than my JoinMarket one, especially once you consider the forward looking anonymity set and all the free remixes that every other output I have coinjoined alongside is also getting.

I guess the essence of what I'm saying is that liquidity is not the same as anonymity set. It is difficult to say which out of JoinMarket and Whirlpool provides the best anonymity set, because it depends entirely on how you use them.

What's important here is to break down what's user's best courses to accomplish mixing. Even if funding blockchain surveillance is completely contradictory to being proclaimed a pro-privacy service, that doesn't change their coinjoin process.
It absolutely does. Any sane user of a privacy service does not want the fee they pay being handed to blockchain analysis to spy on their inputs and potentially censor those inputs based on their findings. This is antithetical to the entire concept of privacy.
legendary
Activity: 3430
Merit: 1957
Leading Crypto Sports Betting & Casino Platform
Great thread @BlackHatCoiner! ....

I just want to know if you see the anonymous (decentralized) casinos as another method to secure your financial privacy? There are still some casinos out there that supports pseudo anonymity, but I will not push large amounts of coins through them.

People can still "mix" their coins through these casinos, until they start asking for KYC verification. Just make sure these casinos are not scams and that you can actually withdraw from them. (They start with no KYC requirements, but eventually bend the knee to law enforcement)  Roll Eyes
copper member
Activity: 1386
Merit: 1481
Bitcoin Bottom was at $15.4k
Great thread buddy, I would love if you could have created some infographics to make it easier to understand instead of reading the whole post, I still appreciate the post though.
Most of the Mixer services work good for months and once they hit a jackpot, a big order worth millions, they simply shutdown their services. I would prefer those which are trusted in the community.
member
Activity: 1204
Merit: 49
Binance #Smart World Global Token


I realized that there are many Bitcoin holders who are really concerned with their safety and privacy that is why they hired these service providers to accomplish the goal. It is just sad that some platforms are not here to do business honestly but has also some evil intent they only knew, judging by some popular mixers who are now six feet understand which left some people wondering what happened. As to myself, I still have to use any of these options since first and foremost I don't have much Bitcoin and I just decide to hold whatever I got.
legendary
Activity: 1512
Merit: 7340
Farewell, Leo
Whirlpool currently has over 8,500 BTC in liquidity: https://bitcoin.clarkmoody.com/dashboard/
Good to know, thanks. Liquidity noted into OP and JoinMarket removed as best in terms of anonymity set.

I don't think so. It doesn't matter if Samourai has a million BTC in liquidity, it depends on how many rounds of coinjoin I go through and how many rounds of coinjoin all the other inputs in my coinjoin transactions go through.
But what ultimately matters when remixing is the new coins that come in. If you do a coinjoin with all inputs remixed, then it won't make a difference. Also, it makes yourself more untraceable to be in a coinjoin with 100 inputs, than in one with 5, so the number of inputs used surely matters.

I've always had mixing in my mind as a picture of a person lost in crowd. The more the people, the less likely to find that one.

Sure, but it is an objective fact that Wasabi use the fees you pay them to pay blockchain analysis companies for information about your UTXOs. And I would argue that is incredibly important for the coinjoin user.
What's important here is to break down what's user's best courses to accomplish mixing. Even if funding blockchain surveillance is completely contradictory to being proclaimed a pro-privacy service, that doesn't change their coinjoin process. Just as if Samurai announced that they're funding the Ukrainian war, it wouldn't change the effectiveness of the coinjoin. It'd ruin their reputation, and people would stop using it; not because of effectiveness, but ethical concerns.
Pages:
Jump to: