Not good enough, needs to be heated with a Bitcoin miner š
I'm genuinely interested in what extreme edge cases would cause a client to reuse an address as well. Here's an example of address reuse regarding Samourai's client - https://twitter.com/brian_trollz/status/1283525347007442944
https://twitter.com/brian_trollz/status/1445065052118261776
But since address reuse is not a part of either coinjoin protocol itself, it's not really relevant to the solving the problem of "What is the best way to make non private inputs into private outputs without revealing any addresses belong to each other".
Would it be fair to blame the user if they imported the seed into a second client running simultaneously? This would cause address collisions since each client is not aware of transactions the other is signing.
Clark, I've never interacted with you before, what are you talking about?
The bad faith claim is that Whirlpool has no deterministic links when it actually has 100% deterministic links to the change peeled in tx0.
WabiSabi eliminates these deterministic links since it makes EVERY spend a coinjoin.
This is Whirlpool 101 and the nature of perfectly uniform postmix coinjoins. It isn't "revealing" or "leaking" doxxic change. Doxxic change is split up before the mix, not after, so there is nothing revealed . Zero deterministic links to anything postmix.
Doxxic change is unavoidable if you want perfect coinjoins. The initial inputs before mixing are naturally not going to be equal to those of other mix participants. You can just mix the doxxic change again when you build up enough.
https://sovrnbitcoiner.com/perfect-coinjoins-are-the-points-of-reference-to-any-collaborative-tx/
When you say "Doxxic change is split up before the mix so there is nothing revealed", that's obviously wrong because I clearly just revealed the doxxic change of the equal sized inputs being entered into the coinjoin.
A "perfect coinjoin" would not produce Doxxic change at all. As you can see, WabiSabi coinjoins do not create toxic change, nothing is "split up before the mix" so ALL of your coins are made private instead: https://mempool.space/tx/01a1a055719129397fb8344b5a09e6cfe72868c8e1d750e621d8b580c96bf77b
What number do you consider to be a "very low anonset"?
If Whirlpool's deterministic links to doxxic change are "officially documented", then stop falsely advertising the coinjoins as having no deterministic links on nostr.
Reusing addresses is bad for privacy, there's no denying that at all.
But at the end of the day, Bitcoin is non custodial: Your keys, your coins. If you choose to send to an already used address, the coordinator can't do anything to stop you in a meaningful way.
This WabiSabi coinjoin has 5 inputs for 0.05000000 and 8 outputs for 0.05000000 - mempool.space/tx/01a1a055719129397fb8344b5a09e6cfe72868c8e1d750e621d8b580c96bf77b
Since it provides even greater privacy than any 1:1 Whirlpool coinjoin can, what do you call that? 160% entropy?
Go ahead and explain privacy 101 then: If I'm a Whirlpool user with two 0.5 BTC mixed outputs and I need to make a 1 BTC payment, how do I spend my coins without merging them?
The reasoning is that this deterministic link should never be leaked. This is why Whirlpool's coordinator should upgrade to WabiSabi coinjoins, which makes ALL of your coins private instead of revealing toxic change.
I think you mean "Toxic change: 0" š
Why aren't merges of private coins smart? It's still private since you keep the lowest anonymity score of the inputs you merge to create a transaction.
I know tx0s are not coinjoin transactions, they are self spend transactions, which is why they reveal a 100% deterministic link to the change.
WabiSabi makes EVERY spend a coinjoin- You never lose your privacy at all since no toxic change is ever created.
Your are showing something like this
https://kycp.org/#/416da38ee147bdc86fd543a474315be920f1138df44560a56bfc3346a7c436df
Btw this is a Wasabi CJ with merges ...
Yes. As you can see from the Wasabi coinjoin, ALL of the coins are made private, so there is no way to unpeel it like I just did with the Whirlpool coinjoin to reveal the new entrants' change addresses.
I'm not referencing a "normal tx", I'm referencing the tx0 self spend that creates the equal sized outputs that entered the Whirlpool transaction.
You say "no shit there are deterministic links in Whirlpool" which is why I'm asking: "Why don't you upgrade to WabiSabi coinjoins so you never create these deterministic links?"
When you send the toxic change to a smaller pool and pay the coordinator fee again, this doesn't eliminate the toxic waste, it just makes the waste smaller.
This is why Whirlpool's coordinator needs to upgrade to WabiSabi so the toxic change is never created at all.
Wasabi doesn't have toxic change. It makes all your coins private: https://mempool.space/tx/01a1a055719129397fb8344b5a09e6cfe72868c8e1d750e621d8b580c96bf77b
That's why Wasabi Wallet's minimum coinjoin round size is 150 inputs, with a maximum of 400 inputs.
In additon to that, ~95% of the value of these inputs are remixes from previous rounds.
What do you mean "it makes nothing traceable?" I literally just traced the exact addresses and amounts of inputs with a 100% deterministic link to each of the new Whirlpool entrants.
If their coordinator upgraded from Whirlpool to WabiSabi, they would not have created these traceable links.