Quote from: bestmixer on June 15, 2018, 08:23:20 AM

3. BESTMIXER CODE CAN NOT BE LINKED WITH A SPECIFIC CLIENT. READ ITEM 1, ITEM 2.

But can it link several addresses together? How do you link that code to the previously used coins; is it like a database/list of codes and transactions?

Quote

Two questions for you, LoyceV:

1. How does your FAVORITE service (of course, in YOUR opinion, the best service, otherwise you would not put advertising of this service in your signature) can guarantee that by mixing 1 BTC today, your coins will not come back to you in a day, a week or a month? (bypassing 2,3,10,100 transactions)?

They don't guarantee that. They explain it better than I can, so I'll quote their relevant posts:

Quote from: ChipMixer on October 10, 2017, 08:13:25 AM

Quote from: pnbamania on October 10, 2017, 12:49:39 AM

I have a concern people, Let's say I send 1 BTC to Chipmixer and it commonizes into smaller chips, example 0.25, 0.1,0.1,0.5 etc etc.. and it gives me the keys all good. But when you spend the transaction and spend it anywhere it seems like it's very easy to pinpoint chip mixer transactions in a block.

Lets pick any block for example and see that there will be barely any transaction that's output is EXACTLY in 0.25 or 0.1 or 0.125 and if there are any transaction you can easily link them to chip-mixer transactions. I been scrolling through last few blocks and I can't seem to find any exact whole output.. when I did a transaction it was so easy to notice on block explorer in the block that was mined.

I suppose the only privacy we get is the fact that no one can pinpoint who exactly sent how much to chip mixer.

ChipMixer provides fungibility, not secrecy.

When you use CoinJoin or TumbleBit, you fungible bitcoins but it is no secret that you used it.
When you use Tor, it hides your connection, but it is no secret that you used it.
When you use Https, it hides your data, but it is no secret that you used it.

Fungibility means that every chip-sized transaction may be owned by anyone and there is no connection with previous transactions.

Quote from: ChipMixer on August 29, 2017, 10:55:33 PM

Quote from: mocacinno on August 29, 2017, 08:46:27 AM

I agree with most of your post, however, having unconfirmed inputs in a regular size does not prove they were mixed by chipmixer at all... I could easily use some of my unspent outputs in a transaction that generates new outputs with the exact same value as chipmixer's chips...

It does not prove they were mixed by ChipMixer... but maybe they were? Lets say you are a blockchain analytist. You encounter ChipMixer-like output. You assume there is 50% probability it may be ChipMixer, so there is 50% chance no link between input and output. You have just gained some fungibility even when you do not use ChipMixer.

Creating your own chips make blockchain analysis harder. We encourage everybody to do that.

Quote from: bestmixer on June 15, 2018, 08:23:20 AM

2. Could you, please give an example of at least one method of attack on a client associated with the BestMixer code?

The only thing I can think of is that someone gets his own coins back after they've been mixed again by someone else. But that's just a matter of chance (not an attack), and can happen to any coins.