Trezor partnering with Wasabi damanges its credibility - read on!
4203 sats \ 20 comments \ @rod 20 Aug 2023 meta

What is new
Trezor is working with Wasabi for Coinjoins, offering it as a great feature and spending in advertising across all known Bitcoin magazines.

Problem
Wasabi is working with chananalysis companies and it uses; from the research I have done; a protocol by the name of "peelchain" instead of the recommended "ZeroLink"
Few articles on the matter:
  • https://www.goodreads.com/en/book/show/57356067-the-cryptopians
    • revelations from journalist Laura Shin’s new book The Cryptopians, which tracks Ethereum’s early years, showed that Wasabi failed to follow the aptly named protocol ZeroLink.
    • ZeroLink requires “zero linking” of mixed and unmixed Bitcoin. Wasabi used a ZeroLink alternative called “peelchain.” The wallet was released in 2017

Summary
It is advised to verify, do the research and do not trust. I have done mine and wouldn't touch Wasabi, nor Trezor after this business deal with Wasabi.
Although, if you do not use the coinjoin feature you should be fine (in theory with Trezor), but after this business deal, knowing that Wasabi works with Chainanalysis companies, I have no trust left for Trezor, therefore, for me personally, Trezor is black listed as mcuh as Wasabi.
I reached Trezor for comments when they launched this "feature", they never answered.
#Bitcoin, #Trezor, #Wasabi, #coinjoins, #ZeroLink, #peelchain
write
preview
related posts
222 sats \ 6 replies \ @petertodd 20 Aug 2023
Wasabi is working with chananalysis companies and it uses; from the research I have done; a protocol by the name of "peelchain" instead of the recommended "ZeroLink"
You are very confused. "peelchain" isnt a coinjoin protocol. It's a term used to describe what happens when people with a large amount of crypto attempt to spread it across a large number of addresses by repeatedly spending it over and over again, resulting in change being spent over and over again.
Wasabi's coinjoin protocol is actually designed to avoid change, by splitting up amounts into a series of carefully chosen denominations. Eg notice how this Wasabi coinjoin has many different outputs of the same value.
reply
321 sats \ 4 replies \ @rod OP 20 Aug 2023
sure, should have used "technique" instead of "protocol" for peelchain, doesn't change the bottom line...
reply
51 sats \ 3 replies \ @petertodd 20 Aug 2023
It very much changes the bottom line. Wasabi doesn't lead to peelchains. When you deposit funds into a Wasabi wallet, in the next coinjoin it splits those funds into different txouts of different values, in a transaction with many more txouts of the same values. That's what provides anonymity.
You are simply wrong.
reply
1104 sats \ 1 reply \ @rod OP 22 Aug 2023
Peter, I have done extensive research about the subject and I have arrive to my own conclusions base on my research.
  • If you have any serious research with evidence to backup your opinion, please point me in the right direction, always open to learn more and to rectify if I conclude, (by my own research, not trusting no one but my verification) that I am wrong.
  • So far you have only written your opinion and give me a link to a transaction in mempool, which does not address the issue mentioned with the mixer itself
Note
  • For anyone wanting more information about the subject, a developer at oxt.me that has done the work and tested the reported issue with Wasabi wallet, posted his findings in this Twitter thread (I mentioned Laurent in the article above as well):
  • Don't trust verify. Here a good source for anyone to learn more about Bitcoin Privacy:
    • https://bitcoin-only.com/privacy
      • Here you will observe the three recommended coinjoin tools currently available in the market which have been tested extensively with no issues found:
I do not have the truth, no one does, I share with the community my research and findings and invite anyone to an open and honest debate with your research, your evidence, your findings.
And my favorite quote applies in this thread:
'Everything we hear is an opinion, not a fact, Everything we see is a perspective, not the truth' Marcus Aurelius
reply
1010 sats \ 0 replies \ @nopara73 26 Aug 2023
I have done extensive research about the subject
Not extensive enough.
The current version of Wasabi doesn't have peelchains, nor peelchains were a bug in 1.0, but a known compromise of ALL ZeroLink coinjoin implementations, therefore the magic trick of samuri taking out the peel from the coinjoin into the TX0 itself is just that: a magic trick, a deception and you're their audience as your sources are exhausted in the samuri proxy websites and the misleading claims of their lead blockchain analyzer's.
The reason why you aren't seeing us engaging in these conversations is that for many years now, they've been trying hard to associate us with criminal entities: Here's the proof: "wasabi is broken because "BunnyKiller69" famous north korean hacker/scammer/fraudster has been caught and was using wasabi. When you look at such claims individually you'll always find something that doesn't add up. Sadly, their craig wright level techno blabla doesn't often bump into sensible developers like Peter Todd here.
Let me leave you with some statistics and sources to research that you were asking for.
  • Wasabi Wallet's development activity is 100 times larger than Samourai's
  • Wasabi Wallet's Twitter activity is 100 times smaller than Samourai's
To learn about the privacy guarantees of Wasabi Wallet 2.0 and to understand why it has no peelchains: https://blog.wasabiwallet.io/privacy-guarantees-of-wasabi-wallet-2-0
To learn generally about Wasabi and Bitcoin privacy:
https://anonymousbitcoin.com/ https://github.com/zkSNACKs/WasabiResearchExperience https://docs.wasabiwallet.io/
To learn about Samourai Wallet, which is a known bad actor:
https://github.com/nopara73/ScamouraiWallet/blob/master/README.md
reply
100 sats \ 0 replies \ @eespn 22 Aug 2023
The amount of evidence that can be found online about Wasabi is overwhelming, your opinion is just your opinion, you keep defending the undefendable...
Any person that wishes to do a little bit of research will find it.
You are the one that is wrong and your insistence in defending a very well known bad actor in the industry tells tons about you...
reply
0 sats \ 0 replies \ @monaco 20 Aug 2023
Exactly this
reply
100 sats \ 0 replies \ @anon 22 Aug 2023
Yo, inventor of the "recommended" ZeroLink here. Wasabi 1.0 was using ZeroLink and 2.0 uses WabiSabi, which you may consider ZeroLink 2.0
I'm not sure what to say here, very many things you've said is incorrect, but I believe you've done your research, it's just you've got caught up with the wrong sources. Mind you, there's a well funded anti wasabi propaganda arm of the scamourai sect that is especially designed to co-opt the Monero community, making them useful idiots in parroting their nonsense and mislead you and the likes so no wonder you're confused.
It greatly saddens me when I see posts like this, I wish it'd be different :/
reply
121 sats \ 1 reply \ @DarthCoin 20 Aug 2023
revelations from journalist Laura Shin’s new book The Cryptopians
LOL you recommend to read a shitcoiner book? Is going up forever, Laura! Remember?
reply
21 sats \ 0 replies \ @rod OP 20 Aug 2023
LOL, you are right, but the reason I recommend the book is to get additional information on peelchain used in Wasabi.
reply
141 sats \ 0 replies \ @notgeld 20 Aug 2023
Old wallet just received new feature and you are complaining.
Ask ColdCard about programmed obsolescence then.
This permanent CJ drama makes me sick.
reply
21 sats \ 2 replies \ @energycurrency 20 Aug 2023
deleted by author
reply
0 sats \ 0 replies \ @stackeraw 20 Aug 2023
+1
reply
0 sats \ 0 replies \ @rod OP 20 Aug 2023
+1
reply
21 sats \ 1 reply \ @eespn 20 Aug 2023
Thanks for sharing this information, more people should be aware, wonder if there is a site with statistic as of how many people is using that service for coinjoins.
reply
0 sats \ 0 replies \ @sime 20 Aug 2023
A new Tor circuit/identity is used for each TX out, so it is actually impossible to track (from the coordinator POV).
reply
0 sats \ 1 reply \ @Sasquatch 21 Aug 2023
I've wondered about Trezor lately. So what's consensus here, Trezor bad?
reply
600 sats \ 0 replies \ @rod OP 21 Aug 2023
It is up to you to decide,
For me they are definitely a bad influence for the Bitcoin ecosystem and what it represents,
Why?
  1. They support alt-coins, most of them (99% IMO) scams
  2. They are in business with Wasabi Wallet, a known bad actor working with chain analysis companies
  3. The Trezor is Open Source, but the Chip they use is not Chip SE, which means, it is not secure enough to keep your funds, they use ARM Cortex-M3 and M4 processors with custom software
Those two reasons above should already give you pause for your think about it.
Now, if you are here, I assume you are a Bitcoiner, thus, Passport from Foundation and Coldcard from Coinkite are the ones I could recommend. Here an article I wrote about it: #226453 , I hope it helps.
Last but not least, if you are gambling with alt-coins or trading with alt-coins for a living, while doing the research looking for a decent seed signer for Bitcoin, found "Keystone" https://keyst.one/, they are, IMO, the most advanced of the alt-coins seed signers, Chip SE, Air Gap, etc, they check all the boxes but one, they support all the scams of the ecosystem...
Hope this helps
reply
0 sats \ 1 reply \ @sandagoriate 21 Aug 2023
I think the best options now are Blockstream Jade and BitBox (maybe for other cryptos) because they have firmware fully open source.
reply
500 sats \ 0 replies \ @rod OP 21 Aug 2023
#226453
reply