Again, there'a no data to share because there's no data collected: Wasabi uses Tor to protect your IP and block filters to protect your xpub.
In a free market, customers are free to choose their businesses and businesses are free to choose their customers. If you don't succeed with the default coordinator, then feel free to use a different one.
I completely agree about the free market principle. We'll keep better building tools and helping people move away from shady, bad-faith "free market agents" to who value human freedom and privacy.
I agree! We should boycott developers who lie to their users about their software in order to pretend it matches the privacy of their competitors. Samourai is not a "full node wallet" and never has been, the developers have no limits to the deception they impose on their users.
Yeah there's no good reason to boycott BIP157. It's the best trade off we have between privacy and the ability to ship p2p functionality in light clients.
They do let you run your own Dojo, but that not being the default is just as bad as Wasabi not allowing non-blacklisting coordinators without recompilation.
So we have two wrongs here and that doesn't make a right.
Arguments against the coordinator customer policy are not arguments against the privacy capabilites of the wallet.
Pretend you could choose the red wallet coordinator guys in one click through the Wasabi GUI, and the red guys would coordinate WabiSabi (not whirlpool) coinjoins for you. Would you agree that the Wasabi client is strictly better privacy than the leaky red wallet, and choose the Wasabi client + WabiSabi protocol to coinjoin since you get support your preferred coordinator using either software?
Correct. Sending out xpubs by default isn't great.
That said, their coordinator doesn't require client xpubs. That's strictly a shortcoming of their wallet architecture. You can still write third party wallets talking to Whirlpool through Tor, without losing privacy. Or you can set up a Dojo on your own computer. Whereas your coordinator interacts with Chainalysis no matter what.
Would you be so kind as to answer my question from the other post, about why you chose to plug into Chainalysis in the first place. Was there external pressure? Why are you guys so evasive about it?
I'm not a lawyer, I don't have access to the email address where people are instructed to send their legal concerns, but I imagine that inbox is not empty of government threats.
Fair enough. That said, going public with your identities seems to have been a bad idea because you're now in a position where you can be blackmailed and threatened. But what's done is done.
And appealing to the "free market" is a cop out. Do you want to answer the question why you need such partners and solutions to begin with, when your competitors don't?
That's a good point! The most likely explanation is that since a red colored competitor collects their users' xpubs by default, regulators have no reason to interrupt their spying. They can just use the honeypot for surveilling red wallet users who are under the influence of a false sense of security.
Think about it this way. Say the government wanted to ban self custody, and there were two hardware wallet companies. One hardware wallet sends all the private keys to their central server by default, and the other hardware wallet generates the keys offline and never leaks them. The government has no reason to target the former because it's not an effective self custody wallet, it serves as bait for those who didn't verify the claims of sovereignty by the developers.
I see what you're getting at but accusing them of being a honeypot is a pretty harsh. I agree that their default model is far from ideal however.
You're still not explaining why Wasabi needs to run UTXOs against Chainalysis. Was there pressure from the regulators? Or are you trying to preempt something?
