Whirlpool is obviously not perfect since I just unmixed the change.
ALL change gets mixed in WabiSabi coinjoins (unless there is a single input worth more than all other inputs combined).
Here's the WabiSabi transaction, look for yourself and try to unmix the change like I did for the Whirlpool coinjoin:
https://mempool.space/tx/01a1a055719129397fb8344b5a09e6cfe72868c8e1d750e621d8b580c96bf77b
Exactly. Instead of peeling your change with tx0 to make it traceable, WabiSabi makes EVERY spend a coinjoin. Leftover change gets turned into amounts of equal sizes which can't be linked to the original input.
Exactly. Since the tx0 peels the change, it creates a 100% deterministic link between the address of the new Whirlpool mixers and the unmixed coins.
WabiSabi makes EVERY spend a coinjoin without revealing any two addresses are owned by the same wallet, so you never have such a thing as an "unmixed coin" at all.
What do you mean "I unmix nothing"? I just showed you the exact addresses and exact amounts belonging to two of the Whirlpool participants. This information would have been hidden in a WabiSabi coinjoin, but Whirlpool leaks it.
Why doesn't the coordinator of Whirlpool coinjoins upgrade their protocol to coordinate WabiSabi coinjoins instead? This upgrade would eliminate their creation of this doxxic change.
Exactly. Unlike Whirlpool, WabiSabi has zero deterministic links: No doxxic change is ever created at all.
Whirlpool leaves deterministic links because it peels the change during the tx0 used to create sized equal outputs. I just unmixed the Whirlpool transaction from your screenshot to reveal the change: https://mempool.space/tx/323df21f0b0756f98336437aa3d2fb87e02b59f1946b714a7b09df04d429dec2
Address bc1qgwv9hn979rex0rhfp3cknfdkyrgk04493gclvv belonging to Whirlpool input 1 created 0.01346981 BTC in traceable change which has 100% deterministic links to bc1qjy3zud5c7qypvgccgvptvaxkcsg6g4jl3u4tdy
Address bc1q528pyda90y4j9nuqrcm65rlxz9txljtn208dqm belonging to Whirlpool input 3 created 0.01971146 BTC in traceable change which has 100% deterministic links to bc1q50akm6ggcwgjext09tuz0rcl6cya2huu70pef4
Feel free to post any other Whirlpool tx ids and I'll unmix them too.
This WabiSabi coinjoin has 5 inputs for 0.05000000 and 8 outputs for 0.05000000 - https://mempool.space/tx/01a1a055719129397fb8344b5a09e6cfe72868c8e1d750e621d8b580c96bf77b
Since it provides even greater privacy than any 1:1 Whirlpool coinjoin can, what do you call that? 160% entropy?
Exactly. All Whirlpools can be traced to their tx0s to unpeel the change.
WabiSabi makes EVERY spend a coinjoin, so your change is mixed, not peeled and revealed like Whirlpool does.
https://kycp.org/#/01a1a055719129397fb8344b5a09e6cfe72868c8e1d750e621d8b580c96bf77b
If I look at your txns there is 236 possible output merges and 298 input merges
finally there is no address reuse in wasabi
vs
this tx is Samourai tx which coinjoin looks untraceable?
https://kycp.org/#/cb0827eeed92d38e12ae2a99e7d8a3fed794329e6918f990b0fdfb36afeace29
Sure, I'll show you exactly how anyone can trace the change from that Samourai Whirlpool tx by unpeeling the tx0 that created its inputs:
Address bc1qr9gukl8ahwm3x7ywdpwhjvs2nt7s49r9u38ef0 belonging to Whirlpool input 2 created 0.00801308 BTC in traceable change which has 100% deterministic links to bc1qcq56q0cmkukju4d07qc34qc6p5pfy24ekjnclm
Address bc1qjrlutevgsy8ltqq7e9s40m8laz5ujzykj0apy9 belonging to Whirlpool input 3 created 0.00132931 BTC in traceable change which has 100% deterministic links to bc1qdqra796rqgnn5gmmfr9qntzg9ftqaykv4sc5tg
Feel free to post any Whirlpool transactions and I'll show you how to unpeel them to reveal the change.
Do you know of any (talented) Bitcoin devs in need of funding that are working on a cross input signature aggregation BIP? The only progress I know of is what I heard from Jonas Nick & Tim Ruffing when they appeared on Stephan Livera's podcast (ep 400).
If wasabi is zerolink then why there is no equal outputs as outlined in the zerolink protocol? No postmix tools after the fact. No segregation of accounts. Do you even know why there is doxxic change? For equal outputs to exist there will be change and coordinator is blinded (soon decentralized) It doesn't know the links between a coinjoin's inputs and outputs. That was one of the major goals of the zerolink framework, that nopara wrote but ironically Wasabi doesn't do equal input and output "zerolink" mixes so they are not equivalent. doxxic change is completely unaffected by mixes since it has never been mixed. Every SW user knows exactly what to do with that doxxic change so there is no combining with other doxxic change that didn’t come from the same source.
The Tx0 makes all your UTXO's share a tx hash, which prevents them from mixing with each other, preventing an "accidental" Sybil attack from entering a large amount of BTC, Samourai separates the coordinator fee in the Tx0 no fee flagging in the fee addresses. Every communication between Alice and the coordinator is made with a different Tor identity. It's transparent for the coordinator if one of the messages is actually sent by Bob, so when Alice sends her clear output to the coordinator it's made with a Tor identity different from the Tor identity used to submit the input and the blinded ouput. Who is using this Tor identity is transparent for the coordinator. It’s two separate Tor identities. This was even in the original zerolink docs IIRC.
So once coins are mixed, they are segregated and can't "accidentally" make their way back to unmixed section of wallet. You have to manually generate a receive address and send from postmix to get utxos back there, which obviously you shouldn't do. This is the only way to have true ZeroLink, where a user can't spend mixed and unmixed together. SW doing ZeroLink original spec. Simultaneous denominated pools, max entropy mixes for the number of inputs/outputs, never 2 or more same previous tx in a same mix, and unequal amount coinjoined spends post-mix if the user chooses.
Here is an impartial opinion
https://lists.linuxfoundation.org/pipermail/bitcoin-dev/2019-December/017542.html
Your claim that Wasabi has no equal outputs is just plain false. Anyone can look at the transactions on the blockchain themselves to see you are lying to them: https://mempool.space/tx/01a1a055719129397fb8344b5a09e6cfe72868c8e1d750e621d8b580c96bf77b
There are...
7 equal outputs for 20.00000000 BTC
3 equal outputs for 10.73741824 BTC
25 equal outputs for 1.34217728 BTC
6 equal outputs for 0.67108864 BTC
8 equal outputs for 0.43046721 BTC
6 equal outputs for 0.28697814 BTC
6 equal outputs for 0.20000000 BTC
11 equal outputs for 0.14348907 BTC
6 equal outputs for 0.10000000 BTC
8 equal outputs for 0.05000000 BTC
17 equal outputs for 0.03188646 BTC
14 equal outputs for 0.02097152 BTC
7 equal outputs for 0.01594323 BTC
6 equal outputs for 0.01062882 BTC
11 equal outputs for 0.00531441 BTC
12 equal outputs for 0.00354294 BTC
13 equal outputs for 0.00262144 BTC
6 equal outputs for 0.00200000 BTC
11 equal outputs for 0.00118098 BTC
13 equal outputs for 0.00100000 BTC
7 equal outputs for 0.00065536 BTC
9 equal outputs for 0.00039366 BTC
7 equal outputs for 0.00032768 BTC
25 equal outputs for 0.00020000 BTC
4 equal outputs for 0.00016384 BTC
10 equal outputs for 0.00013122 BTC
12 equal outputs for 0.00010000 BTC
5 equal outputs for 0.00008192 BTC
15 equal outputs for 0.00006561 BTC
12 equal outputs for 0.00005000 BTC
And most importantly, there is NO TRACEABLE CHANGE in Wasabi, unlike Whirlpool transactions which can always be unpeeled to reveal a 100% deterministic link to the change created from the tx0.
If an input is blacklisted, the input doesn't move at all. It just stays in the original address.
WabiSabi is the name of the coinjoin protocol that Wasabi Wallet, BTCPay Server, and Trezor all use, while Whirlpool is what Samourai and Sparrow use.
Since each client may have different settings, comparing the protocols themselves is the best way to determine which is best for blockchain level privacy.
Correct, because then you would not be able to meet the minimum 5000 sat output if you registered the input by itself. It is a coordinator setting though, haven't tried reducing the MinRegistrableAmount, so idk what happens if you do.
This is a great thread by SW that explains key differences.
https://twitter.com/samouraiwallet/status/1504471329617022995
They’re both non-custodial and use blinded coordinators, a big difference in architecture is how the fee structure works, implementation of ZeroLink, and how Whirlpool allows free remixes (paid for by new liquidity) to increase your anonset.
Couple things to note about Wasabi:
1. Their main coordinator zksnacks blacklists UTXOs and collaborates with law enforcement. A huge red flag.
2. Address reuse and merging unmixed change with mixed outputs is still happening, even in Wasabi 2.0. Since Whirlpool follows ZeroLink, both of these things are impossible in Whirlpool wallets.
IMHO, just use Whirlpool in Samourai/Sparrow and make sure to use your own node.
There is no unmixed change created at all in Wasabi 2.0. All of your inputs (over 5000 sats) get coinjoined: #[4]
Only Whirlpool leaves behind unmixed change since it peels it off in tx0: #[5]
#[3] has it completely backwards: Whirlpool has 100% deterministic links, since the change is peeled off in tx0. WabiSabi completely eliminates this traceable change.
See how easy it is to unmix literally any Whirlpool transaction?
#[4]
Coinjoin coordinators cannot steal Bitcoin. You are lying to scare people out of using non custodial privacy tools.
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.
You can remove the KYC by coinjoining with Wasabi Wallet - https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UbOAbXjzBJg