As a non technical coinjoin user, conversations like this really make it hard to decide whether coinjoining makes sense or not. Seems like both sides of the wasabi/whirlpool debate are positive you’re screwed if you use the other one.
Discussion
Feel free to ask any questions about either implementation, I can provide you examples of coinjoins on the blockchain and walk you through the differences between them.
I think my main question is around wasabi and their relationship with some chain surveillance firm(s). As I understand, they run your utxo by the chain surveillance firm before allowing you into the mix. I don’t have any illicit funds, but isnt this in a way flagging my utxo (which may be a kyc purchase, so in essence flagging my identity) to chain surveillance that I am a coinjoiner.
I understand they would be able to figure that out even if I used whirlpool, but they would have had to actively try to find my specific utxo vs being served a list of all coinjoiners by the coordinator.
If the above isn’t much of a concern, then I certainly like the idea of no toxic change and also the idea of being able to coinjoin any amount.
Also not sure I understand some of the arguments around which protocol is easier for a chain surveillance firm to monitor via leaving some of their own sats remixing in the pools.
I think my main question is around wasabi and their relationship with some chain surveillance firm(s). As I understand, they run your utxo by the chain surveillance firm before allowing you into the mix. I don’t have any illicit funds, but isnt this in a way flagging my utxo (which may be a kyc purchase, so in essence flagging my identity) to chain surveillance that I am a coinjoiner.
I understand they would be able to figure that out even if I used whirlpool, but they would have had to actively try to find my specific utxo vs being served a list of all coinjoiners by the coordinator.
If the above isn’t much of a concern, then I certainly like the idea of no toxic change and also the idea of being able to coinjoin any amount.
Also not sure I understand some of the arguments around which protocol is easier for a chain surveillance firm to monitor via leaving some of their own sats remixing in the pools.
I think my main question is around wasabi and their relationship with some chain surveillance firm(s). As I understand, they run your utxo by the chain surveillance firm before allowing you into the mix. I don’t have any illicit funds, but isnt this in a way flagging my utxo (which may be a kyc purchase, so in essence flagging my identity) to chain surveillance that I am a coinjoiner.
I understand they would be able to figure that out even if I used whirlpool, but they would have had to actively try to find my specific utxo vs being served a list of all coinjoiners by the coordinator.
If the above isn’t much of a concern, then I certainly like the idea of no toxic change and also the idea of being able to coinjoin any amount.
Also not sure I understand some of the arguments around which protocol is easier for a chain surveillance firm to monitor via leaving some of their own sats remixing in the pools.
If your UTXO was created from a KYC purchase, your identity will be flagged as "a coinjoiner" once your funds become private regardless of whether or not you use WabiSabi or Whirlpool coinjoins to make them private.
In the case of chain surveillance firms, coordinators are purchasers of their data, not suppliers of their data. If a coin attempted to register, but is rejected due to a blacklist, that does inform the coordinator that the blacklisted user attempted to make their coin private, but it does not inform the coordinator anything about the IP address or other coins in their wallet; One input could fail to register for coinjoin while the others succeed.
No toxic change is definitely the main benefit. Any change created by postmix spends is able to be recoinjoined for free as well in Wasabi, so you only ever pay the coordinator for privacy a maximum of one time, not every time you spend.
As for attackers remixing, the economics of Whirlpool is designed so that mining fees for all 5 participants are paid by the new participants. This makes it cheap to stay in the pool and costly to enter/exit it. This places legitimate users at a cost disadvantage to the spies, since the spies never intend to exit the pool.
Thanks. One follow up, in wasabi, are the fees not also paid by the new entrants if remixing is free?
In Wasabi, only the coordinator fee is reduced to zero for remixing and change mixing. Mining fees are always paid for each input and output you register even if the coordinator does not charge you their fee. The mining fee prevents the spy from getting into additional rounds for free.
This additionally allows you to remix your coins at any time and as much as you want, without having to wait for new users to enter the pool to pay your mining fees for you.
Here is a good article about Whrilpool
https://bitcoinmagazine.com/technical/how-bitcoin-anonymity-sets-work
https://bitcoiner.guide/doxxic/
You can join the Samourai TG group or RoninDojo group for any questions. Or visit the Sparrow Wallet TG group