Quote from: acseric on June 16, 2014, 04:58:50 PM

I have been following this thread. I think that the issue that Chaeplin is trying to tell you about is that XC id dependent on trusting the XNODE operator. ~~Because the XNODE is, in effect, scrubbing the link between sender and receiver, the XNODE has access to the senders private key, and therefore, can steal the coins.~~

~~This is a huge problem, and why people keep inquiring whether the anon is trusted (how XNODEs work) or trustless.~~

Nope.. Not like that.

~~the XNODE has access to the senders private key~~

https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=631052.msg7341002#msg7341002

https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=630547.msg7258072#msg7258072

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

What's wrong with this ? It's not wallet. It's address.
B and C are belong to same wallet.