Silk Road forums
Discussion => Security => Topic started by: topshelf1 on June 13, 2013, 11:13 am
-
I'd like to give this mixing service a shot...it was recommended by a trusted moderator here...
before pulling the trigger...I just want to see if anyone has had problems with coin getting lost or not delivered or something like that...?
Regards,
Topper.
-
I've personally used it a dozen times, and hasn't been a single problem.
I slowly funnel money into it from two-three sources, then if it's big enough, straight into SR over time intervals.
-
I'd like to give this mixing service a shot...it was recommended by a trusted moderator here...
before pulling the trigger...I just want to see if anyone has had problems with coin getting lost or not delivered or something like that...?
Regards,
Topper.
I put more than the average annual wage of most people through BitcoinFog every few weeks so yeah, it's safe and if there was a problem I'd be one of the first to go haywire about it.
-
Thanks guys...
I've already started putting coin through and is going smoothly...
Regards,
Topper...
-
Why are you doing that? Do you know about this?
Take 2 pennies, drop them into a jar of 10,000 pennies.
Shake Jar.
Remove 2 pennies.
Did you remove the same exact 2 pennies? Probably not.
You can just make a Free Wallet at www.blockchain.com.
Send all your BTC to that Fresh wallet.
Make another Free Wallet at www.blockchain.com
Send the BTC there also....
Do you still have the Same Exact BTC? Probably not.
-
Why are you doing that? Do you know about this?
Take 2 pennies, drop them into a jar of 10,000 pennies.
Shake Jar.
Remove 2 pennies.
Did you remove the same exact 2 pennies? Probably not.
You can just make a Free Wallet at www.blockchain.com.
Send all your BTC to that Fresh wallet.
Make another Free Wallet at www.blockchain.com
Send the BTC there also....
Do you still have the Same Exact BTC? Probably not.
For a vendor you show a serious lack of insight into how bitcoins work and why you'd want to run your funds through a mixing service. The purpose of a mixing service is to obfuscate the source of bitcoins between A and C where B is the mixing service.
-
Hash.thanks for your thoughts...
I considered doing something along those lines...I have several blockchain wallets...all registered through tor of course...(even though the blockchain servers are on the clearnet...)
I suppose you could mix things up doing it that way and it would make it somewhat harder to trace back...
HOWEVER...being new to this game...I like the fact that the bitcoin fog service is on the tor network...
The way I see it...the vulnerability of bitcoin is getting in and out...I took care to purchase anonymously...and then transferred out to a couple of different wallets...before deleting the original account through which I made the original purchase...
but before transferring coin to SR...I wanted to cover up the trail as much as possible...
I think mathematically the advantage of fog...over the DIY method you describe...is that they have a lot more transactions going on...and a lot more accounts...so when you throw pennies in the "jar".... or pool as they call it...the sheer number of transactions (and accounts) makes it MUCH more difficult to put the pieces together...
Although I am not convinced it is impossible...math is a very powerful tool...it would be an interesting challenge to piece things together the way fog does it...
Regards,
Topper...
-
@Hash
It's worrying if you believe the following is safe:
Original source of bitcoin > Wallet 1 > Wallet 2 > Cashout/SR
The blockchains are public information, I just have to follow where the majority of the transaction went. Fair enough SR has a built in mixer but because it is SilkRoad, that is going to be of little use if they figure that out. BitcoinFog runs thousands of transactions through the same addresses and break the payments down into smaller amounts over time so the ability to do any kind of statistical analysis against that is extraordinarily difficult, whereas wallet hopping just takes a few clicks to follow. That is why BitcoinFog obfuscates the source, hopping wallets is just a waste of time as it only provides extremely limited protection.
-
One flaw is that if you use two different mixing accounts to mix two different sets of money that are meant to be kept seperate, they will sometimes be linked to each other.
It is a good service if you want to hide the original of a single cash source, but do not try to manage multiple seperate identities through them.
The other side effect of such a mixing service is that you will also be assoiciated with everyone else using the service. Probably mostly vendors, scammers and some even darker shit.
The inherent flaw with mixing services is that they only mix you with other people who need a mixing service.
-
@ St Exo...
I agree with you..
I don't know why you put me in with Hash on thinking the DIY mixing method is safe...I never said that...and that is why I went through bitcoin fog...
It did not take me long to learn that the blockchain info is public...and that even if you try to mix your coin through several different wallets...it could be pieced together fairly easily...
I am having a very smooth experience with fog...and I absolutely think that anyone (vendor or buyer) who cares about anonymity should use it...
Regards,
Topper
-
One flaw is that if you use two different mixing accounts to mix two different sets of money that are meant to be kept seperate, they will sometimes be linked to each other.
It is a good service if you want to hide the original of a single cash source, but do not try to manage multiple seperate identities through them.
The other side effect of such a mixing service is that you will also be assoiciated with everyone else using the service. Probably mostly vendors, scammers and some even darker shit.
The inherent flaw with mixing services is that they only mix you with other people who need a mixing service.
I am certainly far from an expert on these subjects(!), but this is the exact reasoning that keeps me from using BitFog or other mixing services. Some of these coin tumblers may even be run by LEO for data crunching purposes! If you are careful to buy your BTC anonymously with cash, I see no reason whatsoever how sending directly to your SR wallet could be a security risk at all. LEO will look at the blockchain and perhaps see obviously that your coins went to SR, but so what, as long as your real identity is not associated with the coins you are totally safe. People who need to cash out of BTC back to gov't dollars are in a different boat, but I would still feel much better just selling my BTC for cash, maybe through localbitcoins.com or craigslist or as an SR bitcoin seller.
I think using a mixing service with coins that can be traced back to you is a lot like openly using Tor, GPG, BTC, and hidden services in public, like posting about these things on social networks or using them at a coffee shop or whatever. Sure, these are awesome tools for keeping your activities hidden, but it also broadcasts to anyone paying attention that you have something to hide. (If you have something to hide, keep that fact itself hidden as well!) If you cash out with tumbled coins, it *should* be totally obscured where they came from, but it will be totally obvious that you got them doing something shady. We aren't trying to protect ourselves from the smoking gun piece of evidence, we need to protect ourselves from all the small, legal but suspicious things that could trigger an investigation.
-
One flaw is that if you use two different mixing accounts to mix two different sets of money that are meant to be kept seperate, they will sometimes be linked to each other.
It is a good service if you want to hide the original of a single cash source, but do not try to manage multiple seperate identities through them.
The other side effect of such a mixing service is that you will also be assoiciated with everyone else using the service. Probably mostly vendors, scammers and some even darker shit.
The inherent flaw with mixing services is that they only mix you with other people who need a mixing service.
Good point sir, if there's a better solution to cash btc please let me know (in pm if you prefer)
-
@radi8power...
those are good points too...
I covered myself by buying the coin for cash from a local seller...completely anonymously...
I thought about going straight to SR...but took the advice of a moderator...who clearly knows more than I do...
Scary thought that bitcoin fog could be run by LEO...but I would not discount that...in light of what we are hearing recently...they are EVERYWHERE...
If there is one thing that I take away from this experience so far...it is to exercise extreme caution getting into and out of coin...
Regards,
Topper
-
Any opinions on the "shared send" and "shared receive" features on blockchain.info compared to BTC Fog? Any reason why one is better than the other?
The "taint analysis" and transaction tree graphs available on blockchain.info are eye-opening if you think just sending from wallet to wallet to wallet is enough to hide the source of bitcoins.
-
just used them for the first time, went smooth an flawlessly. be prepared to wait at least 6 hours though
-
I want to hear what StExo has to say about what Tessellated said. He makes an incredibly good point.
-
Let's hear it Exo.....?
I'm genuinely interested at this fuckin' point
With love,
Kenny 'THE FUCK' Powders
-
One flaw is that if you use two different mixing accounts to mix two different sets of money that are meant to be kept seperate, they will sometimes be linked to each other.
It is a good service if you want to hide the original of a single cash source, but do not try to manage multiple seperate identities through them.
The other side effect of such a mixing service is that you will also be assoiciated with everyone else using the service. Probably mostly vendors, scammers and some even darker shit.
The inherent flaw with mixing services is that they only mix you with other people who need a mixing service.
This would be applicable and true as a theory and would be a practical flaw on closed circle mixing services, such as if small ring of connected drug dealers were using their own mixing service which can then lead to a RICO/Joint enterprise case. However for a public and well established service it would be far too difficult a case to argue that by using the service you are inherently part of the illegal side. For example, Facebook is used to convey a lot of information on drug use and I know from reading the papers that a lot of drug deals there days are being arranged over social networks and phones, but other people on the same network do not necessarily have any affiliation to such activity and therefore are not subject to such prejudice since the primary application of social media is private communication (from other users) and to arrange events.
The nature of bitcoin to promote an open currency system which is decentralised and as a measure to increase personal privacy is one of the strengths of the currency to support mixing services. Bitcoin itself is not illegal in any forward thinking country, nor is the right to remain anonymous, and therefore such mixers have legitimate purpose and do not constitute the same kind of sketchy process that note exchanging would be for example which each have individual tracking numbers. Therefore - by the time law enforcement have enough evidence to bring a case against you, you would already be in substantial troubles and the mixing service is only a footnote to the real story to the courts.
In my experience of laundering money, cases do not succeed in court when the only prima facie case is against a person attempting to conceal items when not under legal obligation to disclose them (ie in the normal course of a regulated trade or an established business). When it does become reason to investigate you is at the point you will already be in a problematic situation such as intercepted bulk shipments which even then, the case won't have a high success rate, if any at all if it depends on the factor that a mixing service was employed by the person in question.
-
@ St Exo...
I agree with you..
I don't know why you put me in with Hash on thinking the DIY mixing method is safe...I never said that...and that is why I went through bitcoin fog...
It did not take me long to learn that the blockchain info is public...and that even if you try to mix your coin through several different wallets...it could be pieced together fairly easily...
I am having a very smooth experience with fog...and I absolutely think that anyone (vendor or buyer) who cares about anonymity should use it...
Regards,
Topper
Apologies my mistake, I've misread your message, I'll edit that out.
-
StExo, do you have any opinion on the shared send and shared receive functions on blockchain.info? In terms of whether it accomplishes anonymization or has any advantages/disadvantages compared to Fog?
-
One flaw is that if you use two different mixing accounts to mix two different sets of money that are meant to be kept seperate, they will sometimes be linked to each other.
It is a good service if you want to hide the original of a single cash source, but do not try to manage multiple seperate identities through them.
The other side effect of such a mixing service is that you will also be assoiciated with everyone else using the service. Probably mostly vendors, scammers and some even darker shit.
The inherent flaw with mixing services is that they only mix you with other people who need a mixing service.
This would be applicable and true as a theory and would be a practical flaw on closed circle mixing services, such as if small ring of connected drug dealers were using their own mixing service which can then lead to a RICO/Joint enterprise case. However for a public and well established service it would be far too difficult a case to argue that by using the service you are inherently part of the illegal side. For example, Facebook is used to convey a lot of information on drug use and I know from reading the papers that a lot of drug deals there days are being arranged over social networks and phones, but other people on the same network do not necessarily have any affiliation to such activity and therefore are not subject to such prejudice since the primary application of social media is private communication (from other users) and to arrange events.
The nature of bitcoin to promote an open currency system which is decentralised and as a measure to increase personal privacy is one of the strengths of the currency to support mixing services. Bitcoin itself is not illegal in any forward thinking country, nor is the right to remain anonymous, and therefore such mixers have legitimate purpose and do not constitute the same kind of sketchy process that note exchanging would be for example which each have individual tracking numbers. Therefore - by the time law enforcement have enough evidence to bring a case against you, you would already be in substantial troubles and the mixing service is only a footnote to the real story to the courts.
In my experience of laundering money, cases do not succeed in court when the only prima facie case is against a person attempting to conceal items when not under legal obligation to disclose them (ie in the normal course of a regulated trade or an established business). When it does become reason to investigate you is at the point you will already be in a problematic situation such as intercepted bulk shipments which even then, the case won't have a high success rate, if any at all if it depends on the factor that a mixing service was employed by the person in question.
Still, being "mixed in" with child pornographers, high-level crime cyndicates and darker entities is a rather scary thought, compared to something as "public" and openly received as Facebook. Sure, drug deals are being done, but not nearly as many as legitimate activities. Whereas with Fog, the chances of you mixing in with an illegitimate source is highly likely.
It's the nature of anonymity. Simple as that. Don't do what is "to be expected".
-
hm
-
Thanks for all the useful info!
-
One flaw is that if you use two different mixing accounts to mix two different sets of money that are meant to be kept seperate, they will sometimes be linked to each other.
It is a good service if you want to hide the original of a single cash source, but do not try to manage multiple seperate identities through them.
The other side effect of such a mixing service is that you will also be assoiciated with everyone else using the service. Probably mostly vendors, scammers and some even darker shit.
The inherent flaw with mixing services is that they only mix you with other people who need a mixing service.
This would be applicable and true as a theory and would be a practical flaw on closed circle mixing services, such as if small ring of connected drug dealers were using their own mixing service which can then lead to a RICO/Joint enterprise case. However for a public and well established service it would be far too difficult a case to argue that by using the service you are inherently part of the illegal side. For example, Facebook is used to convey a lot of information on drug use and I know from reading the papers that a lot of drug deals there days are being arranged over social networks and phones, but other people on the same network do not necessarily have any affiliation to such activity and therefore are not subject to such prejudice since the primary application of social media is private communication (from other users) and to arrange events.
The nature of bitcoin to promote an open currency system which is decentralised and as a measure to increase personal privacy is one of the strengths of the currency to support mixing services. Bitcoin itself is not illegal in any forward thinking country, nor is the right to remain anonymous, and therefore such mixers have legitimate purpose and do not constitute the same kind of sketchy process that note exchanging would be for example which each have individual tracking numbers. Therefore - by the time law enforcement have enough evidence to bring a case against you, you would already be in substantial troubles and the mixing service is only a footnote to the real story to the courts.
In my experience of laundering money, cases do not succeed in court when the only prima facie case is against a person attempting to conceal items when not under legal obligation to disclose them (ie in the normal course of a regulated trade or an established business). When it does become reason to investigate you is at the point you will already be in a problematic situation such as intercepted bulk shipments which even then, the case won't have a high success rate, if any at all if it depends on the factor that a mixing service was employed by the person in question.
Still, being "mixed in" with child pornographers, high-level crime cyndicates and darker entities is a rather scary thought, compared to something as "public" and openly received as Facebook. Sure, drug deals are being done, but not nearly as many as legitimate activities. Whereas with Fog, the chances of you mixing in with an illegitimate source is highly likely.
It's the nature of anonymity. Simple as that. Don't do what is "to be expected".
Seconded. The argument for "bitcoins being legal and for authorities to investigate your transaction history would necessarily entail that they've boned you somewhere else along the line" isn't valid for me. I think a lot of the time police will follow money when they can't prove dealing otherwise. In fact, if this is the argument then why not withdraw directly from SR to blockchain.net, because as long as you're careful with your dealing they shouldn't have any reason to investigate your blockchain in the first place.
Of course I would use caution in withdrawing money, and there are other techniques mentioned in the forum. I'm just not convinced with your argument about the fog being so public that it holds legitimate users. In facebook the legitimate users far exceed the drug dealers and this cannot be equated to bitfog; I see no reason why someone would use bitfog if they're not doing something illegal. Even if there is one person out of a hundred that are legitmate then it's not good enough.
Personally I would seek other methods. Just my opinion though and I respect the intentions of bitfog and I agree that we are winning the war against authorities. We need to proceed with caution at every point and doubt the services that we trust at every corner.
-
One flaw is that if you use two different mixing accounts to mix two different sets of money that are meant to be kept seperate, they will sometimes be linked to each other.
It is a good service if you want to hide the original of a single cash source, but do not try to manage multiple seperate identities through them.
The other side effect of such a mixing service is that you will also be assoiciated with everyone else using the service. Probably mostly vendors, scammers and some even darker shit.
The inherent flaw with mixing services is that they only mix you with other people who need a mixing service.
This would be applicable and true as a theory and would be a practical flaw on closed circle mixing services, such as if small ring of connected drug dealers were using their own mixing service which can then lead to a RICO/Joint enterprise case. However for a public and well established service it would be far too difficult a case to argue that by using the service you are inherently part of the illegal side. For example, Facebook is used to convey a lot of information on drug use and I know from reading the papers that a lot of drug deals there days are being arranged over social networks and phones, but other people on the same network do not necessarily have any affiliation to such activity and therefore are not subject to such prejudice since the primary application of social media is private communication (from other users) and to arrange events.
The nature of bitcoin to promote an open currency system which is decentralised and as a measure to increase personal privacy is one of the strengths of the currency to support mixing services. Bitcoin itself is not illegal in any forward thinking country, nor is the right to remain anonymous, and therefore such mixers have legitimate purpose and do not constitute the same kind of sketchy process that note exchanging would be for example which each have individual tracking numbers. Therefore - by the time law enforcement have enough evidence to bring a case against you, you would already be in substantial troubles and the mixing service is only a footnote to the real story to the courts.
In my experience of laundering money, cases do not succeed in court when the only prima facie case is against a person attempting to conceal items when not under legal obligation to disclose them (ie in the normal course of a regulated trade or an established business). When it does become reason to investigate you is at the point you will already be in a problematic situation such as intercepted bulk shipments which even then, the case won't have a high success rate, if any at all if it depends on the factor that a mixing service was employed by the person in question.
Still, being "mixed in" with child pornographers, high-level crime cyndicates and darker entities is a rather scary thought, compared to something as "public" and openly received as Facebook. Sure, drug deals are being done, but not nearly as many as legitimate activities. Whereas with Fog, the chances of you mixing in with an illegitimate source is highly likely.
It's the nature of anonymity. Simple as that. Don't do what is "to be expected".
Seconded. The argument for "bitcoins being legal and for authorities to investigate your transaction history would necessarily entail that they've boned you somewhere else along the line" isn't valid for me. I think a lot of the time police will follow money when they can't prove dealing otherwise. In fact, if this is the argument then why not withdraw directly from SR to blockchain.net, because as long as you're careful with your dealing they shouldn't have any reason to investigate your blockchain in the first place.
Of course I would use caution in withdrawing money, and there are other techniques mentioned in the forum. I'm just not convinced with your argument about the fog being so public that it holds legitimate users. In facebook the legitimate users far exceed the drug dealers and this cannot be equated to bitfog; I see no reason why someone would use bitfog if they're not doing something illegal. Even if there is one person out of a hundred that are legitmate then it's not good enough.
Personally I would seek other methods. Just my opinion though and I respect the intentions of bitfog and I agree that we are winning the war against authorities. We need to proceed with caution at every point and doubt the services that we trust at every corner.
This. This. This
It's so important that we have a HUGE plethora of options at our disposal. Sure. StExo uses Fog, and good for him. We NEED people using that, to keep away from what WE are using. The more people who use different "mixing" services or "less obvious" means of transferring funds to SR the better.
So, in no way do I condone the usage of it, I just never will use it myself. More power to the people who DO use it though; as we need them. Just be smart, use what works for YOU, and don't do anything dumb (leads back to the "be smart" comment...)
Good luck, guys. I'm heading off for the day.