Print Page - OpenNode requires KYC now!

This news is very fresh and I know there's a lot of users of OpenNode;

Quote

OpenNode offers a robust platform that consists of an easy to use eCommerce and retail plug-in solution, payment infrastructure API's for developers, and the fastest payment processor limits to allow for brand new payment models and instantaneous settlements.

OpenNode was known as bitcoin payment gateway through blockchain or lightning network
But lately, they are requiring KYC now to their users for them to withdraw their money. We all know that most of us disagree by putting KYC on every platform we're in.

https://i.redd.it/gb7d9f9629i31.png

So there's a lot of users of opennode who bypassed the platform to withdraw their money. Just by filling the Welcome Back Screen, you can now access the platform and withdraw all of your money in there.

Quote

We're giving people time to submit their information. Meanwhile, your account is operational and allows you to withdraw all your funds without submitting any documents, just fill the Welcome Back screen.

It's temporary only and if you knew that you're one of those users of opennode, withdraw it now.

The only way you can set up a service without kyc/aml is if you set it up as a hidden resource in tor or equivalent "darknet" site, or something entirely p2p like Bisq which uses tor hidden service for publishing.

The only place you could still set up services like that without kyc is in an unregulated country, which will no doubt get pressured to adopt regulations anyway.

In such site only the community itself can patrol funds origin, and you could end buying "tainted coins" (ie. stolen from an exchange/phished wallet).

Interesting times indeed...

Quote from: Artemis3 on August 24, 2019, 04:54:34 PM

Stop spreading misinformation. KYC is a thing made by paranoid people to extract personal info under the guise of protection. You just saying stuff but have nothing to back it up with. Are you some sort of lawyer or professional in this field to be making such vast claims.

No one ever needs your KYC the entire thing is bs and directly supports crime not oppose it. You talk of the dark web. Go look how much KYC stuff is for sale there. IT just makes peoples KYC into a commodity and criminals will thrive off of it by steal trading and otherwise abusing it. Without KYC they would have no access to this info.

Quote from: Artemis3 on August 24, 2019, 04:54:34 PM

There are other Bitcoin payment gateways that don't require KYC.
Like what @OmegaStarScream, BTCPay is the one that's leading due to OpenNode's downfall.

Bitpay was also a choice but there's also an issue regarding their platform.
You can read it in here; https://www.reddit.com/r/Bitcoin/comments/cu8wcv/amazon_watch_just_lost_a_100k_bitcoin_donation/

Another one bites the dust. :'(

Unlike BitPay's recent changes (https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=5173083.0), it looks like this only applies to merchants/vendors. According to OpenNode's terms (https://www.opennode.co/terms-and-conditions/), they put the legal burden of verifying customer identity solely on the client. So at least there's no KYC for customers who are buying goods and services:

Quote

For each transaction, You bear sole responsibility for confirming (a) Your customer’s identity and payment information, (b) Your receipt of payment in full, and (c) that payment was made according to the instructions given through Platform. You represent, warrant and covenant that You will not make, provide, receive or attempt to make, provide, or receive payments from or to any person or Entity that is (x) a third-party, other than Your customer or (y) currently subject to any U.S. sanctions administered by the Office of Foreign Assets Control of the U.S. Treasury Department.

Quote from: OmegaStarScream on August 24, 2019, 05:57:24 PM

Payment processors are not getting any better for both the merchants and users, not sure why would anyone use them at this point. instead of using third party service to accept payments from your clients, you could set up your own server, node and use BTCPayServer and the problem is solved.

Indeed. Payment processors are going to implement KYC one by one. I'm hoping this starts incentivizing people to use BTCPayServer rather than centralized third parties.

Quote from: OmegaStarScream on August 24, 2019, 05:57:24 PM

Payment processors are not getting any better for both the merchants and users, not sure why would anyone use them at this point.

payment processors should be used for when the merchants want to deal with fiat not bitcoin directly so that they could mitigate the volatility. that is why they are still using them to this day. otherwise if they are going to just get paid in bitcoin and receive bitcoin, they shouldn't have used a payment processor in first place!
and since when fiat is involved KYC is expected and there shouldn't be any complains about it in my opinion.

Quote from: Lauren Smith on August 24, 2019, 06:07:49 PM

Quote from: Artemis3 on August 24, 2019, 04:54:34 PM

You are very correct the dev should stop the misinformation because what he is saying has nothing to back it up and again am highly in support of kyc because it allow exchanges and other crypto sites to monitor their customers transactions.

Quote from: avikz on August 25, 2019, 06:21:37 AM

Contrary to a lot of people here, I would welcome such steps taken by legal merchants and businesses. Because legal businesses are bound to the comply with the local laws and regulations. Also I don't understand why would anyone resist such KYC requirement if that particular individual isn't doing anything illegal. If I have a t-shirt store today and my payment settlement provider is asking for KYC, why would I deny the request and take my business elsewhere?? What's the problem in here??

I have to say that I completely agree. It's sad that many users don't understand that KYC is actually designed for their protection not against them.
Also, in order to run legitimate business crypto related services must performe KYC. And I don't understand why would some user want to do business with some exchange or other service that is not compliant with the law, at the end this might have bad consequences. But people obviously don't have a broader picture.

Quote from: bitbunnny on August 25, 2019, 08:10:48 AM

It's sad that many users don't understand that KYC is actually designed for their protection not against them.

It may have something to do with the possible misappropriation of their documents and risk it poses to their privacy.
There has been any cases of hack on websites, and users documents can be sold in case of such an occurrence and used wrongfully. Even too exchanges has been compromised at some point and in addition to the loss of funds KYC documents can as well be stolen.

And on the issue of it stopping fraud, it is not really a stringent measure as it can be bypassed by the perpetrators.

Quote from: bitbunnny on August 25, 2019, 08:10:48 AM

Quote from: avikz on August 25, 2019, 06:21:37 AM

I have to say that I completely agree. It's sad that many users don't understand that KYC is actually designed for their protection not against them.

If the design worked, then absolutely. But the design is deeply flawed and probably causes more identity theft than it prevents. How many of these incidents (https://www.csoonline.com/article/2130877/the-biggest-data-breaches-of-the-21st-century.html) would have been far less serious if it wasn't a legal requirement to hold all that data? Creating vast treasure troves for criminals to plunder is utterly stupid.

Quote from: DooMAD on August 25, 2019, 09:46:40 AM

Quote from: bitbunnny on August 25, 2019, 08:10:48 AM

Quote from: avikz on August 25, 2019, 06:21:37 AM

I have to say that I completely agree. It's sad that many users don't understand that KYC is actually designed for their protection not against them.

It's kinda risky especially when you're a big company. You've got a point but you didn't think about the individual users who use gateways for their businesses. The platform might see it as an opportunity for them, even you have bad intentions, it's still risky for the individuals to send their private information.

If you're talking about business, big companies are trying to negotiate with gateways personally, so there's no problem with that and no confidential information will be given because contracts are existing while in the individual users, it's very unfair for them.

Quote from: DooMAD on August 25, 2019, 09:46:40 AM

Quote from: bitbunnny on August 25, 2019, 08:10:48 AM

Quote from: avikz on August 25, 2019, 06:21:37 AM

I have to say that I completely agree. It's sad that many users don't understand that KYC is actually designed for their protection not against them.

KYC is something that is being imposed by governments, i doubt many site operators would bother with the annoyance otherwise. Localbitcoins is already on a countdown to freeze accounts without the KYC thing done (They extended the date to Oct 1), and they use a third party to handle that.

Regardless of what you like or not, that is the reality. They have the power to go after site operators, unless they anonymize completely, like the Bitcoin author did. Same as centralized coins, they can be shutdown at any moment if they are not fully p2p decentralized. In hostile countries, they can also go after the peers, which is why you need the anonymity and obfuscation so survive operating a site like that.

Of course it doesn't work, of course there is a ton of identity data theft, but the stubborn lawmakers don't get it, and those are imposing the rules.

Quote from: fiulpro on August 25, 2019, 02:10:49 PM

I don't think there is any problem with the KYC since it is somehow necessary , the problems regarding bitcoins is rising and therefore governments are getting strict I don't think not doing KYC is even an option for them.
If you give your information to someone then you for sure won't try and do stupid things , end of the story , people should understand that it can actually help to keep a database of every user and track the activities.
KYC is important.

Necessary for business only right?

I mean there's a lot of people who hide their personalities because it's very dangerous for them if they hold a lot of money. How can you trust the platform? If this is a local platform then I gladly do KYC because it's a trusted platform that is designated and exclusive for our country if not then it's dangerous to risk your personal information.

Try to check the disadvantages of sending personal information in a platform even you have good intentions.
If someone doesn't like KYC, it doesn't mean they're doing something wrong, that's a fact we should remember. :D

Quote from: avikz on August 25, 2019, 06:21:37 AM

this is basically the "nothing to hide argument". there are a number of problems with it. read about them here: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nothing_to_hide_argument#Against_the_argument

i quite like this position:

Quote

First, if individuals have privacy rights, then invoking "nothing to hide" is irrelevant. Privacy, understood as a right to control access to and uses of spaces, locations, and personal information, means that it is the right holder who determines access. To drive this point home Moore offers the following case. "Imagine upon exiting your house one day you find a person searching through your trash painstakingly putting the shredded notes and documents back together. In response to your stunned silence he proclaims 'you don’t have anything to worry about – there is no reason to hide, is there?'" Second, individuals may wish to hide embarrassing behavior or conduct not accepted by the dominant culture. "Consider someone’s sexual or medical history. Imagine someone visiting a library to learn about alternative lifestyles not accepted by the majority." Finally, Moore argues that "nothing to hide," if taken seriously, could be used against government agents, politicians, and CEO's. This is to turn the “nothing to hide” argument on its head. Moore argues that the NSA agent, politician, police chief, and CEO have nothing to hide so they should embrace total transparency like the rest of us. "But they don’t and when given the technological tools to watch, the politician, police chief, or CEO are almost always convinced that watching others is a good thing."

why volunteer to give up your privacy when it's never been necessary before? how about the risk of 3rd party compromise of your data, which happens literally every day now? why do government/police have us regular folks under surveillance but we know nothing about them?

and then there's this:

Quote

Harvey A. Silverglate (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Harvey_Silverglate) estimated that the common person, on average, unknowingly commits three felonies a day in the US.

i hope the government isn't watching you too closely, avikz! ;)

Quote from: finaleshot2016 on August 24, 2019, 02:42:40 PM

This news is very fresh and I know there's a lot of users of OpenNode;

Quote

https://i.redd.it/gb7d9f9629i31.png

Quote

It's temporary only and if you knew that you're one of those users of opennode, withdraw it now.

Many companies are now enforcing the kyc and this trend will increase more and more. Even i saw that local bitcoin is making it compulsory for its users to do a Tier 1 verification by a certain date else there account will be disabled. This is because of the regulations which are coming up in crypto.

Quote from: figmentofmyass on August 26, 2019, 05:57:28 AM

why volunteer to give up your privacy when it's never been necessary before? How about the risk of 3rd party compromise of your data, which happens literally every day now? why do government/police have us regular folks under surveillance but we know nothing about them?

You have a very valid counter argument here. However, It's not voluntary but we are obligated to such requirement because the dynamic business world is changing every single day. Every new technology or innovation comes with related pros and cons. As a society, we adopt the positive effects and try to mitigate the negative ones.

How many hacking incidents you have seen reported during your childhood and how many you are seeing now?? The nature of crime is also changing and the mitigation techniques are also getting more intelligent day by day. But does that mean we would not adopt to the changes? That's life! Either we adopt or we go extinct!

It's the duty of governments and police to mitigate criminal activities and that's why it's their right to know about their citizen's whereabouts! It's not the job of a common man like me. We know their name and contact details, why would we need their driver license numbers as well??

Crypto possesses many bright life changing possibilities but it also possesses many risks to the society. Money laundering and terrorism financing are two major concerns of the regulatory authorities. KYC is one preliminary step to mitigate such risks and I support that! It's always better to be regulated than to receive a blanket ban.

Quote

Harvey A. Silverglate (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Harvey_Silverglate) estimated that the common person, on average, unknowingly commits three felonies a day in the US.

i hope the government isn't watching you too closely, avikz! ;)

I hope the same! But there's really nothing to hide!

Quote from: figmentofmyass on August 26, 2019, 05:57:28 AM

this is basically the "nothing to hide argument". there are a number of problems with it

best (most simple) counter-argument IMO:

Nothing to hide: bad people use privacy to do bad things. good people want to stop this

The above is true, so it's easy to sell

however, let's simply invert that

Everything to protect: good people use privacy to do good things. bad people want to stop this

both are equally valid, but the latter trumps the former. to protect both your own and others privacy, conducting as much of your life as is possible in a private manner is important, as it makes the set of anonymised data larger, and more resistant to deduction.

Quote from: avikz on August 26, 2019, 08:45:58 AM

I hope the same! But there's really nothing to hide!

you're wrong

@avikz you're making the fatal mistake that you and everyone else will always be able to trust those who obtain possession of data. The data can be kept forever (storage is cheaper than ever), and can be used to hurt as well as to help.

with attitudes like yours, I wouldn't want you as a business partner, a customer, a neighbour, a friend, a family member or in any association at all

Quote

Possible! I can't deny the fact that data can be misued as we have many examples. I am just looking at the brighter side of it because increasing KYC compliance will inly increase the chance of cryptos being accepted into the mainstream economy. Resisting it will only make things worse than ever!

Quote from: avikz on August 26, 2019, 09:03:09 AM

I am just looking at the brighter side of it because increasing KYC compliance will inly increase the chance of cryptos being accepted into the mainstream economy. Resisting it will only make things worse than ever!

you're wrong, again

economic power gives you more powerful rights than anything else can, rich people know this

you're basically encouraging everyone to simply accept a reduction in the power everyday people have, by giving up information about themselves to the most powerful people who are abusing the information to increase their own economic power, and may well abuse it in increasingly less ethical ways

it's not like you don't already know this at some level, but now I've spelled it out to you, will you continue to adhere to your point of view?

Enough of all these KYC disagreement is it biting or killing, kyc here and there, at least by now, many people should have already understood that this requirement is quite very mandatory if we really want to get the industry regulated. Most people keeps shouting on top of their voices for regulation, how do we exactly want the regulation other than some of these things that is already being implemented.

How do you catch a thief if not by its identity, you see in this cryptocurrency industry, kyc is much more needed than all those personal disagreement with kyc, it is time we embrace it and just make sure that whoever we are submitting our kyc to will not use it against us please. Government would also need it if they are to regulate the industry.

Quote from: SquallLeonhart on August 26, 2019, 02:17:39 PM

many people should have already understood that this requirement is quite very mandatory

no it isn't

Quote from: SquallLeonhart on August 26, 2019, 02:17:39 PM

we really want to get the industry regulated

speak for yourself

regulations get used to push small businesses out of the marketplace, and are hence a bad idea that only established/big businesses want

Quote from: SquallLeonhart on August 26, 2019, 02:17:39 PM

Most people keeps shouting on top of their voices for regulation

I'm not. I am a person. Other don't want it either, and choose to avoid it

Tell you what: you use it, if you want to. Don't tell me or anyone else what to do though

Quote from: SquallLeonhart on August 26, 2019, 02:17:39 PM

How do you catch a thief if not by its identity

and it's already been adequately proven in this thread that protecting your identity is not just for crooks

Quote from: SquallLeonhart on August 26, 2019, 02:17:39 PM

kyc is much more needed than all those personal disagreement with kyc

wrong again

Quote from: SquallLeonhart on August 26, 2019, 02:17:39 PM

it is time we embrace it and just make sure that whoever we are submitting our kyc to will not use it against us please.

that's incredibly naive. thank god you've not got any power (one can tell these things)

Quote from: SquallLeonhart on August 26, 2019, 02:17:39 PM

Government would also need it if they are to regulate the industry.

terrible idea, the same old "we're protecting you" will really mean "we're protecting our friends"

Quote from: Lauren Smith on August 24, 2019, 06:07:49 PM

Quote from: Artemis3 on August 24, 2019, 04:54:34 PM

Interesting point. What do you think is the main driver behind all these companies suddenly imposing KYC for all their users?
I mean, I could see it being required for larger payments, but not for low-value transactions.

You can get an unverified Paypal account and still use it to spend/collect a pretty decent amount of money.

Just like what I've mentioned in previous posts, it's only a matter of time before these services/payment gateways implement KYC rules in their own platforms to adhere with what the government says. It's not really hard to tell if they're going to implement it or not because that's what most services are going for anyway even if they remained strict to their stand about not budging in to the government's control. In order to keep their business afloat, they have to do some form of a compromise even though it might hurt their user-base.

Now I'm keen to the developments of KYC for BTCPay.

Quote from: Lauren Smith on August 24, 2019, 06:07:49 PM

Quote from: Artemis3 on August 24, 2019, 04:54:34 PM

The gentleman probably wants us to feel cornered and defeated. He got me a little though lol. I wonder why he tried scaring the community in such manner?

Anyway, most of my crypto activities thesedays happen on decentralized platforms which enable me have total control over my fund. This approach is to crypto space what burying money underground is to fiat world.

Quote from: rodel caling on August 28, 2019, 11:53:33 PM

The only place you could still set up services like that without kyc is in an unregulated country, which will no doubt get pressured to adopt regulations anyway.

You had point for that mate there's a lot of country not requiring kyc, but time comes all country plan to regulate crypto currency.
One of the reason countries start to regulate crypto because regulation in my opinion is the key to collect taxes from the crypto holders and kyc requirement is the key to locate the users need to pay taxes.
[/quote]

No taxes to pay on crypto. It has nothing to do with the government and thus no taxes. IF you don't use fiat there is no tax. Doen't matter the value is in usd it is still crypto and distributed by people like you and I.
The government does not own crypto and never will. I would like to see them come to my house and ask my to pay tax??? They welcome to try anytime. xD

Quote from: thirdprize on September 13, 2019, 12:53:44 PM

Only way to get investor $$ is to be legit and that means KYC.

You are right, but same investors are the ones that are antagonizing KYC because they felt their information is not being protected at that while they are in terrain of a blockchain technology that is meant to operate fully on decentralization, but sometimes, I know we have to be a little bit flexible on some rules when we want things to run smoothly, we cannot have our cake and eat it all.

Evil people are taking advantage of e KYC to perpetrate evil, and the only way that they can be stopped is through KYC, with KYC government would even be able to protect investors and be able to go after scammers, I don’t think this should really stop us from still having some anonymous transaction to a length, just not going to be fully.

Quote from: RealMalatesta on September 16, 2019, 06:29:05 PM

Evil people are taking advantage of e KYC to perpetrate evil, and the only way that they can be stopped is through KYC, with KYC government would even be able to protect investors and be able to go after scammers, I don’t think this should really stop us from still having some anonymous transaction to a length, just not going to be fully.

Well I fully agree with you. Evil minded people tends to exploit this non-kyc thing of cryptocurrency to scam investors. We can see that happened on the different altcoin projects where anonymous were once prioritized. With KYC, especially those who are creating start up project will definitely aware that whenever they scam people they will not go unnoticed because their identity are known. As for exchanges, government requires them to do them so they have no other choice but to follow it or else they will be shutdown. I fully understand OpenNode requiring KYC to be able to withdraw a fund, it is the government demand to prevent money laundering so they have to give in.

Bitcoin Forum

Bitcoin => Bitcoin Discussion => Topic started by: finaleshot2016 on August 24, 2019, 02:42:40 PM