# Who will run the CoinJoin coordinators?

**URL:** <https://delvingbitcoin.org/t/who-will-run-the-coinjoin-coordinators/934>\
**Category:** Philosophy\
**Created:** [June 2, 2024, 9:59am UTC](https://delvingbitcoin.org/t/who-will-run-the-coinjoin-coordinators/934 "2024-06-02T09:59:08Z")\
**Posts on this page:** 1\
**Showing post:** 19

<div class="post-metadata">

**Author:** ![AdamISZ](https://delvingbitcoin.org/user_avatar/delvingbitcoin.org/adamisz/32/418_2.png) [@AdamISZ](https://delvingbitcoin.org/u/AdamISZ)\
**Post date:** [September 21, 2024, 3:17pm UTC](https://delvingbitcoin.org/t/who-will-run-the-coinjoin-coordinators/934/19 "2024-09-21T15:17:30Z")

</div>

Oh, so it uses SINGLE|ACP ? Every time people analyzed that idea before they stopped because of the restriction of SINGLE requiring matching in/out indices, which means you can’t get privacy \* . How did you get round that? Maybe there’s a doc I can read somewhere?

\* I mean, a scenario where one contributor adds an input and an output then “passes on” the incomplete transaction, they have to match the position of the input and output.

> [@1440000bytes](#):
>
> No hardcoded addresses for bootstrapping.

Aren’t nostr relay addresses hardcoded, as seeds? Obviously you can discover others, but that’s possible with all of these approaches.

---

_[View the full topic](https://delvingbitcoin.org/t/who-will-run-the-coinjoin-coordinators/934)._