Quote from: evtrmm on June 12, 2014, 12:57:20 PM

Whatever it is, let us get to REV 2 and THEN do a true bounty test.

this shit hasn't gotten so stupid and childish.

If 4 transactions happened in the same block and receivers are known, would you be able to tie those transactions back to sender? This is my concern at the moment.

Yes. If you want hard link, you have to wait enough time.

FYI.

Owner of Xnode should not spend coins from Xnode for privacy of users.
B and C can be used to single input.

Quote from: atcsecure on June 11, 2014, 08:20:32 PM

Quote from: sukottosan_d on June 11, 2014, 08:15:39 PM

Quote from: phosphorush on June 11, 2014, 08:11:14 PM

So when you send from original address A to the receiving address D , it goes to the mixer B, the mixer makes a new address C to send the amount to the receiver D? And Chaeplin doesn't get only A?

And chaeplin is adding that the mixer only uses one address for you, so once you know A, you can trace it. Which is what I said before. You have to assume A is known.

that is not how the mixer work's

The highlevel summary is this

The mixer tells the client to send coins to wallet b, however wallet C is used to send coins to the final user, there is NO link from wallet B to wallet C unless somebody manually moves the coins from C to B