Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

Fix message #1829

Merged
merged 1 commit into from Jul 7, 2019

Conversation

@nopara73
Copy link
Collaborator

commented Jul 7, 2019

@benthecarman Good catch, but PR #1828 is not good. Only if anonset 1 is when the warning should be shown. If anonset 2, then the heuristic is only 50% accurate, so warning message should not be shown. What can be improved is the message itself.

Closes #1826
Closes #1828

@nopara73 nopara73 merged commit e8acb85 into master Jul 7, 2019

1 of 4 checks passed

Wasabi.Linux queued
Details
Wasabi.Osx queued
Details
Wasabi.Windows queued
Details
CodeFactor No issues found.
Details

@nopara73 nopara73 deleted the nopara73-patch-1 branch Jul 7, 2019

@benthecarman

This comment has been minimized.

Copy link
Collaborator

commented Jul 7, 2019

We may want to put a warning about mixing coins with different levels of privacy. Maybe something like: "Mixing coins of different privacy levels will give all the coins the privacy of the lowest coin"

@nopara73

This comment has been minimized.

Copy link
Collaborator Author

commented Jul 7, 2019

Why? What's wrong with that?

@benthecarman

This comment has been minimized.

Copy link
Collaborator

commented Jul 8, 2019

If in the same transaction I coinjoin an anonset 2 coin and an anonset 80 coin, wouldn't the 80 coin be able to be linked the 2 coin

@nopara73

This comment has been minimized.

Copy link
Collaborator Author

commented Jul 8, 2019

To the 2 coin. But the observer don't know where the 2 coin nor the 80 coin comes from. It doesn't even know if the 2 coin is a 2 coin and the 80 coin is a 80 coin. While for the 1 anonset coin anyone can see that's a 1 anonset (unmixed) coin. As far as the observer is concerned they can come from any source. Of course there are probabilities involved with what the observer can work with, but the point is that, it's not at all obvious that joining mixed coins are a terrible practice. We have a hunch that it is a bad practice, but it's at the very least controversial.

IMO if we decide to clutter the UI, this should be uncontroversial clutter at the very least.

@MaxHillebrand

This comment has been minimized.

Copy link
Collaborator

commented Jul 9, 2019

But the observer does know that the coin has 2 anonset - because in one transaction there are exactly two equal value outputs. Now, he might not know the previous history, but he can see that there are two coins.

Agree on the UI clutter, I think we really need to figure out how to have non-abrasive UX guidance for privacy best practices. But I don't think that just a one sentence notification is the right way to go. See #1369.

@nopara73

This comment has been minimized.

Copy link
Collaborator Author

commented Jul 9, 2019

But the observer does know that the coin has 2 anonset - because in one transaction there are exactly two equal value outputs. Now, he might not know the previous history, but he can see that there are two coins.

Not necessarily. If one of the 2 coin comes from a mixed coin, then the anonset is not known, but rather it's a set of possible values. Imagine this:

tx3:

- coin1 (5)
- coin2 (5)

The observer can see that one of the coin comes from directly to an input, and the other one comes from a mix. It doesn't know which one.

tx2:

- coin3 (10)
- coin4 (10)
- coin5 (10)

The observer knows that coin3 goes into tx3, and that one of those coins were mixed in tx1. Now, back to the original tx3, let's say coin2 is ours with 2 anonset. But the observer doesn't know. It only knows that it has either 2 anonset, 2*3 anonset or (tx1 anonset)23 anonset, assuming tx1's mix is all coming from unmixed.

@MaxHillebrand

This comment has been minimized.

Copy link
Collaborator

commented Jul 9, 2019

Ah, yes, you are right, thanks!
As always, "it's more complicated..." 😄

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Projects
None yet
3 participants
You can’t perform that action at this time.