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. π
What's everyone's preferred hot wallet?? I just booted up a samourai and I'm liking it a lot so far.
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
I recommend Wasabi Wallet.
#[2]
-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 π΅
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.
You should just use WabiSabi coinjoins instead of Whirlpool coinjoins so doxxic change is never created at all.
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 π£
(The 0.7 and 9.5 outputs obviously have enough value to meet the 0.5 pool minimum again, but the others cannot.)
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:

The new bitcoin magazine article you linked comes from a Wasabi developer not a more neutral party like Shinobi. The WabiSabi implementation is fairly new, correct?
If we are using biased opinions, I would like to hear Kortik's counter to these points as he seems to have a deeper technical understanding than I do. #[6]
If I assume all these points are true, they would carry much more weight if they didn't use chain analysis. Really is a huge blow to their credibility and effectiveness of entering their service in the first place.
If they are going to use chain analysis to tell them what is allowed, doesn't this defeat the purpose? What if I received coins from some nefarious actor before going into their mix unbeknownst to me? Will I be rejected and flagged? Runs contrary to the service as that is what you are trying to avoid when trying to mix.
https://sethforprivacy.com/posts/fungibility-graveyard/#wasabi
If you unwittingly and unknowingly received coins from a nefarious actor identified by a coordinator, then nothing happens. That UTXO just sits there in the original address instead of being coinjoined.
This does not affect the user's privacy in any way whatsoever: All the user has to do is switch to a different coordinator who doesn't consider this coin to be a risk to their business or their customers, and coinjoin it with them instead.
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:
