While the naive per round privacy expectations from Whirlpool are objectively smaller than WabiSabi (5 input minimum in Whirlpool compared to 150 input minimum in WabiSabi), that's just an implementation detail. There's no coordinator fee charged for remixing using zkSNACKs' WabiSabi coordinator either.
The advancement that makes the WabiSabi coinjoin protocol so much better is that you gain COMPLETE privacy on your coins, whereas Whirlpool links your transactions together due to common input ownership being revealed and toxic change being created during the premix transaction.
WabiSabi coinjoins gives the same privacy UX to Bitcoin as Monero does to Monero 🎠The only exception is if you are the largest whale in your coinjoin round - since Bitcoin does not have confidential transactions, a whale's coins might require multiple remixes before gaining full privacy.
You can read more from the mailing list post if you enjoy the technical details: https://lists.linuxfoundation.org/pipermail/bitcoin-dev/2022-April/020202.html
There is no coordinator fee charged but you still have mining fees for every round on WabiSabi, no?
Yea I know about the toxic change part of Whirlpool. Seems like a trade off for completely uniform indistinguishable input/output amounts.
While the decreased privacy for the being the largest amount in WabiSabi rounds is the trade off for increased flexibility of input/output amounts.
Yes, it's a very important detail that WabiSabi does not incentivize free Sybil attacks like Whirlpool does: In Whirlpool, the victims of Sybil attacks pay for the block space used by an attacker, who remixes for completely free. WabiSabi is more resilient to Sybil attacks because the attacker has to pay for the block space they use.
Fair point
