That's my point:  Attackers only have to pay for block space once to enter Whirlpool to get infinite Sybil attacks for free.  With WabiSabi, mining fees create an economic defense against Sybil attackers because they would have to incur a continuous cost to attack each round.


Generating change outputs is not inevitable when using Wasabi, you can pay your destination directly within a coinjoin transaction and never receive change.


You can coinjoin any amount with the WabiSabi protocol, zkSNACKs' coordinator sets a 5000 sat minimum, but that's an arbitrary setting for DoS protection, there's no fundamental reason why a UTXO would get "too small to coinjoin".  There's even an extra tool in Wasabi to precisely eliminate change when spending outside of a coinjoin: https://twitter.com/wasabiwallet/status/1664718704628645890


I know it's hard to believe that all participants have the same sized UTXOs, but you can verify with your own eyes that they actually do:


Even if you have some non standard amount like 0.09698481 as an output, there's no way to determine if it is a payment, if it is change, or which inputs created it.


Since we have no reason to believe that the round was Sybil attacked, then it's best not to assume it was deanonymized based on a guy from Twitter saying "it looks like".


Because with WabiSabi, even UTXOs that do not have identical values to yours contribute to your UTXOs privacy, not just the ones that have identical values.  There are 195 outputs containing a total of 44.125 BTC in the attacker's transaction, so it's even possible that the attacker with the 12.475 BTC input created zero out of the 3 outputs for 5.36870912 BTC because all of his coins were split into addresses containing smaller amounts.

This is why guessing and calling it "deanonymization" is bad, since there's no consequences to the accuser for accusing, why not make the accusation?


Common ownership is revealed from Whirlpool's premix transactions, I never claimed common ownership is revealed "once you enter Whirlpool".


Users of WabiSabi are never faced with this decision because they can send their payments directly in a coinjoin so they never encounter change.  Even if you had change because you spent coins outside of a coinjoin, you can always coinjoin your change.

The same can not be said with Whirlpool because you always get stuck with traceable Bitcoin no matter what you do. You cannot send a payment directly in a Whirlpool coinjoin unless the recipient wants an amount of exactly 0.5, 0.05, 0.01, or 0.001 BTC.  You also can't coinjoin change below 0.001 BTC.