Avatar
Kruw
0b9de7c5e82d26c285690a13cd164149a5a0ee3131b9912e1c0bb36c66b471ab
Taxes are a scam. Inflation is a stealth tax. Bitcoin fixes this.
Replying to Avatar Seth For Privacy

A post on Wasabi Wallet and their new protocol, WabiSabi after more digging/research:

First off, please do not connect my joining their Space last week or researching their protocol as lending *any* credence or support for their approach or wallet. I still do not recommend using it in any way.

Digging into WabiSabi has revealed some core issues that should prevent you from considering using it. Note this list is not in any particular order.

1) Wasabi's funding and willing usage of chain surveillance companies puts your on-chain data at risk when you use them.

This usage of CA could not only lead to harming your privacy directly, but could also easily be turned into a honeypot where "bad inputs" automatically get sent to mix with only Sybil inputs, providing 0 privacy but not showing that in your client.

Easy surveillance.

2) WabiSabi as a protocol is only a tool for aggregating inputs where each input/output is blinded from the coordinator, and is not in any way a Coinjoin protocol - it is merely the input aggregation portion of one.

As such, the specifics of the WW2 protocol are unclear.

3) There is currently *zero* way to verify the privacy provided by a given mixing round in WW2, and even Wasabi themselves don't seem to understand how their "anon score" metric works.

If you can't verify the privacy you get, you *should not trust it*.

4) "Lonely whales" (i.e. those with larger amounts of Bitcoin) can often gain *zero* privacy in mixes and have 100% deterministic links between their inputs and outputs.

Have seen as little as 6 BTC gaining no privacy from mixing rounds.

5) Due to the client + coordinator not learning amounts chosen by participants in rounds before mixing, you can never be sure that a mixing round provides you with any privacy, as it's always possible no one selects the same amounts as you, providing an anon set of 1 (your input/output).

6) The usage of "big TX = good privacy" in Wasabi marketing is BS, as the only thing that matters for privacy in a transaction is the potential outputs to match your inputs.

That is really only the outputs that share a denomination with your output, not all outputs in a TX.

7) If the creators of this purported privacy tool don't know how to measure the privacy provided by their protocol, it should raise red flags for you.

Not knowing how your own protocol actually provides privacy opens up so many potential implementation flaws.

8) There is a *long* history of tracing of Wasabi's previous implementation due to flaws in protocol and flaws in implementation, so we should be incredibly wary of trusting privacy claims until 100% proven over time.

9) There remain *zero* post-mix spending tools in Wasabi, something that is absolutely vital to actually gaining privacy from Coinjoin's when spending Bitcoin. Even if the protocol was perfect this would lead to many privacy issues and "foot guns".

This post comes after spending many hours digging into the WabiSabi protocol, their documentation, and speaking with them at length.

I have no personal beef with Wasabi but try to remain open to learning from new approaches and wanted to give WabiSabi a fair shake.

As a note to Thibaud and others I spoke with on the Space last week, that was not merely recon or similar, I genuinely wanted to learn and thought that would be a good place.

Unfortunately I didn't really get much mic time or many questions answered and it felt like marketing.

I don't write this thread to incite more hateful rhetoric between "camps," but because I care about *your* privacy above all and do not want to accidentally push people to use a tool I don't deem sufficient for privacy in Bitcoin.

Just as I love and recommend Monero widely while working on Bitcoin, I love and recommend Samourai Wallet as a proven tool for privacy that I have used successfully over the years and seen proven time and again to work and provide solid privacy on-chain.

If I saw Wasabi Wallet as a workable and useful privacy tool today without core issues I wouldn't hesitate to recommend it, as I'm not an anything maximalist or tied to any camps.

But that is not the case today, and I can't recommend anyone use Wasabi Wallet (still).

I'm sure this will piss a lot of people off (I seem good at that recently πŸ™ƒ) I want to always be sure that people know where I stand in relation to privacy tools, and that stance hasn't changed despite spending a good amount of time digging into Wasabi.

tl;dr: Keep using Samourai Wallet or Sparrow Wallet for Bitcoin privacy, the holistic toolkit they've built is beyond compare and has a proven track record of efficacy.

I'm surprised you decided to repost this on Nostr despite having the claims already debunked by Shinobi 7 hours ago:

https://twitter.com/brian_trollz/status/1642957595575984135

How could you possibly reach the conclusion that a Samourai coinjoin would give you more anonymity than a WabiSabi coinjoin? For example, even if you disregarded ALL of the possibilities created from input and output decomposition, there's still 5 inputs and 8 outputs of the 0.05 denomination in this coinjoin compared to a Whirlpool coinjoin that has only 5 inputs and 5 outputs of the 0.05 denomination:

#[4]

I'm going to start cross posting my best Twitter content to Nostr. This is a one way ticket - Twitter will not receive any cross posts from my Nostr content. 😈

I prefer Wasabi for maximum privacy and Blixt for my mobile Lightning wallet.

-WabiSabi doesn't leave behind unspendable toxic change like Whirlpool, your entire balance is broken down into private amounts

-WabiSabi has much larger coinjoin rounds (150-400 inputs) than Whirlpool (5 inputs), meaning you gain much more anonymity per tx transaction fee.

-WabiSabi allows on demand remixing. Over 95% of WabiSabi coinjoin volume is coming from a previous coinjoin round whereas the remix ratio is fixed at 60% for Whirlpool.

-WabiSabi allows inputs to be consolidated in a coinjoin without revealing they belong to the same wallet. Whirlpool consolidates inputs in a self-spend transaction, linking them together.

There's a Twitter space hosted by Bitcoin Magazine today that will go in depth comparing the two: https://twitter.com/wasabiwallet/status/1640769217879506944

Mesmerized by the mempool 😡

I can only thing of one instance in which merging post mix coins could create a near deterministic link, which would be if you sent a single UTXO to an empty wallet, coinjoined for a single round, then swept the resulting UTXOs to cold storage.

This edge case correlation is prevented if you register a second UTXO (especially if the second UTXO is already private), remix any UTXO from the first round, or merge your coins in two separate transactions when spending.

What sort of actions in Wasabi would undo the benefits of your coinjoin? If you have both non-private and private coins in your wallet at the same time, the wallet selects your private inputs when making a payment.

Correct. Tor is already bundled with Wasabi so you get privacy out of the box without any other configuration needed.

I would never admit it to a shitcoiner, but Lightning is a nightmare UX without relying on a custodial service. Despite giving myself >10x the liquidity of the payment size in direct channels with a common peer on two of my own wallets, I cannot manage to pay myself more than 100k sats reliably.

Thank you, this is the correct link I am looking for. Your original source did not have the code:

#[4]

This is useless because Samourai keeps all of the code for the coordinator closed-source: Sovereign Bitcoiners cannot run their own Whirlpools, they must ask permission from the Samourai developers 😣

There's no privacy advantages of Whirlpool over Wasabi 1.0. The only difference between those implementations is the tx0 transaction that Whirlpool creates prior to coinjoining.

The privacy sacrifice of the tx0 transaction is a tradeoff to "speed up" registration so a user can participate in multiple rounds simultaneously since tx0 creates all their outputs immediately. Here's a very simplified MSPaint example of how WW1 can make change more private than Whirlpool:

This concern about the possibility of being blacklisted wouldn't explain why you wouldn't want to use the coordinator if you were not blacklisted.

It's like saying your favorite restaurant is McDonald's, but you refuse to ever drive there to eat because you are worried the restaurant will be closed when you get there and you have to go to Burger King right next to it instead.

There is not only one centralized coordinator with Wasabi, unlike Whirlpool which Samourai made closed source in order to try to monopolize Bitcoin privacy as a for profit business. Another Wasabi user posted in Telegram yesterday about how he just made their own coordinator using the open source code from zkSNACKS without permission:

What bullshit? Tell me a single reason someone who wants privacy would use Whirlpool instead of Wasabi:

#[2]

The implied tradeoff is that there are less occurrences of each standard denomination compared to WW1/Whirlpool which forces every participant to create the same size standard denomination: https://blog.wasabiwallet.io/privacy-guarantees-of-wasabi-wallet-2-0/

However, this tradeoff is overwhelmingly negated once the round gets large enough; Since there is no 1:1 ratio of participants to standard amounts of a single size like WW1 or Whirlpool, observers have to consider all the possible compositions and decompositions of ANY input and ANY output.

Since zkSNACKS has a minimum of 150 inputs per round (up to 400), the possibilities break your calculator: