Bitcoin Forum

Hey guys,

what is your opinion on AML (Anit Money Laundering) and KYC (Know Your Customer) on Bitcoin?

I know that some companies like Elliptic and Skry (former Coinanalytics) are working on this.

Thanks for some thougts on this :)

 Any bitcoin exchange that wants to be legitimate will incorporate KYC and AML.  They have no choice but do this as most countries are on board.

I don't know how often this thread is updated but it is quite an in depth analysis - https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=454795.0
 
 I've had to show ID to use moneygram... it sucks but unless you want to do smaller transactions over a longer period of time, you're stuck.

Personally I have no problems providing my ID for the KYC procedure to the exchanges if they require so, I am accustomed to this process already anyways so it's not a big deal to me. I know some people will feel uncomfortable giving out private details but we the Bitcoin users aren't doing anything illegal using the crypto coin so we don't have to worry about this. This regulation is against what Bitcoin stands for but we have to submit to it I guess.

But if someone really wants to launder Money over bitcoin, he could buy bitcoins over localbitcoins or any other black market? Send the bitcoins over 100,000 addresses and nobody can trace it...is that right?

I don't understand the need for any site to have to know who their customers are if they're using bitcoin.  I can understand why they would need to know who their customers are when they're dealing with the fiat system because the KYC rules help reduce fraud....But, one of bitcoin's most attractive features is its security which allows its pseudo-anonymity....I don't like having to prove who I am and where I live when I spend my money....I don't like it so that's why I use bitcoin in the first place!

That will be the most horrible think to happen to the bitcoin earning community. The main attraction of bitcoin to some people is its anonymity.

If bitcoin is bounded by all these rules, fiat will have no difference with bitcoin. I think people should avoid such companies who are planning for these type of regulatory implications on general people.

I undestand but how about the companies like Elliptic and Skry (former Coinalytics) which are trying to trace bitcoins in the blockchain?

I mean if companies like Elliptic and Skry are successful Bitcoin will be not anymore that annonomyous I guess...

I have no problem with it, when it is really necessary - for example playing with HUGE bankrolls at a casino would require you to send them your ID.
But again - I don't feel bitcoin services in most part are legitimate enough for me to fully trust them with my credentials.

I think it would be a lot better if there were no such thing as the AML and KYC requirements, but I feel like it's an evil I can deal with.  I still have never had to show ID to buy bitcoin, but I have had to tumble my coins to prevent coinbase from locking my account.

yes this can be done but not in big amount to be considered actually as money laundaring. KYC and AML just kills the anonymity and decentralization concept of bitcoin.

These rules stifle growth of a few aspects of bitcoin.
Find it interesting how far bitcoin has gone from its roots of anti government to full submit ass up in the air. Guess greed outruns the freedom aspect bitcoin could have offered.
The more rules that are brought in the less of a movement bitcoin becomes.

Bend yer knee for thy government!

They are necessary measures to prevent fraud, Bitcoin needs regulated exchanges to bring peace of mind to the investors.

I do not see the point of what these services do.

Please explain it to me.

 I don't see how greed is a factor in this situation.  Bitcoin is still a decentralized (free of gov't control), trustless currency with a publicly shared ledger, a pretty good amount of privacy (though probably not as good as cash) and some very low transaction fees.  If we want to integrate it into society and be able to convert freely between other forms of currency, we have to respect the laws that were in place before Bitcoin was conceived.  Failing to do so would result in prosecution.  Am I being greedy for not wanting to end up in court and possibly do some jail time?  What was your vision of Bitcoin?  How did you envision its use?

First, there is CoinJoin and CoinShuffle and JoinMarket. You can't prove anything when you start seeing these kinds of transactions and when coins go through tumblers or mixers or game sites and even crypto exchanges. Then you can bounce from one coin to another alt-coin and from one exchange to another. Most crypto to crypto only exchanges do not require verification.

The only thing these KYC and AML requirements do is make it more difficult for regular users.

I've created accounts with a lot of exchanges but ended up not using them as much. There are a few I found that do not yet require verification for small amounts, so I tend to use those.

Ok, but how good are the companies like Skry and Coinanalyticsto to track bitcoins? Any ideas?

These rules suck and corrupt what bitcoin should be about and the movement that people used to believe in before the profits started piling into their wallets. The more you let them in the more they take up space and eventually kick you out of your own house.
Meaning bitcoin will become theirs and no longer for the people.

Says who?

Today people seem to be more and more trained to proactively put themselves into the slave role to be whipped by the corrupt establishment at their choosing whimpering "thank you, my masters, I deserve it".

Implementing AML and KYC for Bitcoin will kill Bitcoin. Instead you will have the same old fiat, only digital and with full surveillance capacity. If that happens, I'll leave Bitcoin forever. The MIT guys are working on it disguised as "science" (right now one of their snakes is doing an AMA at Reddit).

ya.ya.yo!

No one can fully implement AML and KYC for Bitcoin. I will clarify this by saying, it is unlikely and improbable.

Just look at the current situation, of the 15 million bitcoins in existence today, who knows who owns what and can it be proven? Of the thousands of addresses with balances now, who controls or owns what?

You know your own, but do you know anyone else's aside from people you've dealt with and aside from those who have claimed their own addresses by talking about them or using vanity addresses?

Let's look at the big exchanges today: stamp, coinbase, and a whole bunch of others. Beyond a hop or two from addresses they control, do they know who really owns the next one, or are they just guessing?

As far as they are concerned, I'm just a regular guy who blends in with the crowd.

AML and KYC need to go hand in hand. I think most exchanges are working on this so that they can interface with bank to get fiat deposits. I think as long as exchanges are doing this, it will be difficult for money laundry to operate smoothly and undetected using bitcoin.

Wonder how much of the issue I have with these two rules is a age thing. Seems that quite a lot of people have no problem with filling out these forms and giving up personal information to achieve a goal.
Speaking from first hand knowledge you can not trust governments to have your best interests at heart and should protect your cyber identity as much as possible in case you end up on the wrong side of the fence.