Whirlpool reveals common input ownership from consolidating inputs into tx0
At the pre-mix stage, Whirlpool splits an input in to multiple inputs of the size needed to enter the corresponding pool. Each input the enters the pool separately. Where is the consolidation exactly?
If I have .0007 and .0004 but Whirlpool requires a .001 standard denomination, then I must consolidate these inputs in tx0, revealing they are owned by the same wallet. This also creates .0001 in leftovers that can continue to be traced to future transactions.
and reveals non private change that can be tracked.
It sends non-private change to a completely separate account and the software prevents users from combining it with coinjoined outputs.
Since you can't spend this leftover amount anyway, why not just add it to the mining fee?
Additionally, since you are coinjoining with users who have leaked their IP address or xpub address, it's unlikely a Whirlpool coinjoin round ever gains any anonymity at all.
Absolutely nonsense speculation. Zero anonymity? You are suggesting that no one interested in coinjoining and privacy is running their own node?
How is it nonsense? Since the Samourai and Sparrow clients don't use Tor or a full node by default, it causes all of the users with default wallet setups to unknowingly participate in sybil attacks against users that change all of the default settings to prevent their IP address and xpub address from being leaked.
Wasabi enforces privacy by default with Tor and client side block filters, preventing any IP addresses or xpub addresses from being leaked by honest users.
WabiSabi coinjoin fix these leaks so that no two addresses are ever linked to each other
Except when they
are linked to each other, as I've shown you evidence of three times previously and you've ignored each time:
https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=5286821.msg61947309#msg61947309Of course I'm ignoring it because it's a stupid point, everyone already knows you shouldn't reuse addresses, it's in the Bitcoin whitepaper:
As an additional firewall, a new key pair should be used for each transaction to keep them from being linked to a common owner. Some linking is still unavoidable with multi-input transactions, which necessarily reveal that their inputs were owned by the same owner. The risk is that if the owner of a key is revealed, linking could reveal other transactions that belonged to the same owner.As Satoshi points out, all of the inputs of a Whirlpool tx0 are revealed to be owned by the same user.
(as long as you are not a whale with more liquidity than the rest of the round combined, obviously).
Except you have absolutely no idea what the liquidity of the rest of the round will be, and are entirely dependent on other users' inputs, meaning you don't need to be a "whale" at all in order to receive absolutely zero privacy from a Wasabi coinjoin.
If this input received absolutely no privacy then, prove it. Tell everyone which input(s) belong to its owner:
https://mempool.space/address/bc1qrmmypw3g2ds4aqgh3nqc59qhdp9qk779x2zlru