Freedom and PowerSuch an exaggeration. But the solution proposed in this paper is too simple: Just add a whitelist/blacklist and that's it—— Qualification certificate ("I certify that my withdrawal comes from one of these deposits") Exclusion proof ("I prove that my withdrawal did not come from one of these deposits"). You can use some kind of cryptographic proof to prove that your funding source is unrelated to the hacker's address. Kind addresses can easily provide proof, while hacker addresses cannot provide this proof. Then you can freely use this coin mixer, and the next step we are more familiar with is depositing money at address A, B address withdrawal, creating privacy. Of course, maintaining the entities on the whitelist/blacklist still relies on centralization. This is unavoidable because it involves the real world, and this entity may face some pressure in the future. For example, if Coinbase now requires KYC of recharge/withdrawal addresses, this entity may face regulatory pressure in the future, which could significantly increase the scope of the blacklist. However, this is the worst-case scenario. This approach solves a major problem in my heart, which is the conflicting attitude towards privacy, and it really makes me happy.