in the light of what's happening in the mixer scene it seems to me the time of centralized mixer services had come to an end.
In the meantime better ways exists to protect your privacy. Please learn and apply for yourself.
https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=178336.msg51179260#msg51179260
In the meantime better ways exists to protect your privacy. Please learn and apply for yourself.
https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=178336.msg51179260#msg51179260
You seem to have missed this.
Wasabi does not compare.
Quote
Ideal fungibility requires every Bitcoin transaction to be indistinguishable from each other, but it is an unrealistic goal. ZeroLink's objective is to break all links between separate sets of coins. ZeroLink presents a wallet privacy framework coupled with Chaumian CoinJoin, which was first introduced in 2013 by Gregory Maxwell. A mixing round runs within seconds, its anonymity set can go beyond a single CoinJoin transaction's if needed, and its DoS resilience presumes a transaction fee environment above $1 Bitcoin.
boy, it was just a link to start with something to learn and apply for yourself.
if you're here to learn and not for the entertainment only you will find a lot of usefull discussions to apply better privacy in your (daily) use of Bitcoin.
https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=279249.0
https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=5146241
the concept of chipmixer has the flaw you have to trust an private key which is known by the mixer. "not your your keys - not your bitcoins" or in this case "private keys that are known to an other party are worthless because you have to trust the other party"
and the flaw will not become less a flaw if the mixer is paying one of the highest in a signature campaign. (by the way I doubt you will stop promoting it if something happened with chipmixer. we had the case in the past)
It surely didn't stop you from promoting Bitblender so what are you trying to say here?and the flaw will not become less a flaw if the mixer is paying one of the highest in a signature campaign. (by the way I doubt you will stop promoting it if something happened with chipmixer. we had the case in the past)
what I'm trying to say is that you have to trust a private key of the centralised mixer just for the time of mixing your coins (exception: some Newbies used mixers as an Bitcoin online wallet) and in the case of chipmixer the private key is created by chipmixer and you have to move your coins from this chipmixer private key to your own private key afterwards.
two flaws here:
1. laziness and costs: to move the coins again you have to apply an extra step and it will cost you fees. if Newbies tend to use a darknet(!) mixer as an online wallet I'm very certain a large portion of users of chipmixer don't move the mixed coins from the chipmixer private key to an own private key afterwards.
2. privacy: the chipmixer private key is known to chipmixer (and other parties?). if you want to have real privacy you have to move the coins away from the chipmixer private key with an additional mixer with extra costs. how mad is this? I admit there is no way to avoid the danger of logs or other instruments of sharing the secrets of the mixing process also if you use other mixers like bitblender. you have to trust the mixer in any way. therefore again, time of mixers had come to an end.