From 1e74a70e8f06476bea3972b71a69b7fbf8c84124 Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001 From: Yahia Chiheb Date: Wed, 17 Jul 2024 19:47:31 +0100 Subject: [PATCH] Update sentence --- docs/FAQ/FAQ-Introduction.md | 3 +-- 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 2 deletions(-) diff --git a/docs/FAQ/FAQ-Introduction.md b/docs/FAQ/FAQ-Introduction.md index c6d1a1d8a..cd4ba81a5 100644 --- a/docs/FAQ/FAQ-Introduction.md +++ b/docs/FAQ/FAQ-Introduction.md @@ -113,8 +113,7 @@ The follow-up concern is the inverse of the above. It is possible that the server could *only* include one 'honest/real' coin in the mix and supply the other coins themselves. This gives a false sense of security, **but does not worsen the existing privacy of the coin**. It would also be noticeable to all users excluding the user being targeted as their coins would not be mixed. -It has been argued that this 'attack' would be very costly in terms of fees because the number of coins being mixed is verifiable. -Though it is true that remixes pay zero coordination fee to zkSNACKs, they do pay mining fees. +It has been argued that this 'attack' would be very costly in terms of fees because the number of coins being mixed is verifiable, and they always pay mining fees. See [here](https://github.com/WalletWasabi/WabiSabi/blob/master/protocol.md#attacks-on-privacy) for more info. ### What is the history of Wasabi?