Bitcoin Forum

Hey guys,

With all the KYC talk lately I wanted to open up a thread and ask about your opinion.

The side of the user:
- Prefers no KYC
- Prefers anon coins as a payment platform
- If a KYC is triggered, they want to trust the brand with their documents

The side of the casino:
- Regulators are asking them to do KYC, but they need to find a balance on when it's triggered. E.g. to keep a portion of the user happy, they can rise the trigger to a certain amount.
- They are tied to a payment provider, either because of the license or CMS, and can offer only a certain portion of cryptocurrency.
- Users are abusing them if there's absolutely no KYC matrix in the system.

What would, in your opinion, be the best balance here?

Efialtis from BTCGosu mentioned that some of the casino managers make exceptions, and I can imagine how that's possible, but I'm curious in what you would like to see there.

Most will probably say that they are against KYC, which is very reasonable if the business has major processes related to cryptocurrency (cryptocurrency, which we know, was originally created to to attain financial freedom from the hands of governments).

Personally, I believe government still has to have it's part, but they have to be limited. So for both of those who want to have 0 KYC implementation and casinos and regulators, they have to meet in the middle, which I think  the idea of having KYC being asked is based on the amount of money.
Also, casinos should not just accuse anyone without any reason, if they ask for KYC they should entirely explain what happened and why they ask for identifying documents. (I know there might be privacy concerns here, please share your knowledge about it, I'll be glad to hear it).

There is no solution.

Centralized Casino always required you "KYC", never believe any casino who offers you "Without-KYC" from Centralized Casino. A casino who offering without KYC is always Decentralized CASINO while the type gambling is on-chain gambling (Using smart-contract without any developer touch). But the problem for Decentralized Casino, we really have limited gambling game (Most the time, Dice-chain or Lottery).

Always be ready for "KYC". My advice, play on casino who have higher minimum withdraw for required "KYC". Example like "Stake", I already tested withdraw 10,000$ they not ask me KYC.

Current method is good enough until better technology comes along, and that's not far away. I am pretty sure that next one will be Zero Knowledge -based confirmation system where casinos and regulators know it's me without me revealing any information or scanning my passports etc that might get stolen and leaked. Which in my case has probably already happened as i gave my ids in the past a lot without considering the consequences.

If the question is that do we need KYC at all, then the answer is that it isn't something we get to control.

1. Apparently a higher percentage of gamblers would prefer casinos that have no KYC requirements because this will help save the unnecessary stress for verification of user's account and the KYC restrictions sometimes placed on account that are yet to be verified.

2. I think the demand for this will be a rare occurrence since everything now evolved round about digital currency in this era.

3. Gamblers don't use KYC request to build their trust on a gambling website, what they build upon is the capacity to how far they can deliver their services when it comes to enjoying gambling varieties without any delay or denials in their gambling experience with their casino.

I don't think i can really side the other side

I think a simple KYC is the solution nothing much to be asked to the user and besides KYC doesn't combat 100% on what the government really trying to limit. Yes it mitigated the risks of these money launderers but I think even with a thorough KYC it's still not enough to stop them at all.

True there is no solution they will ask for KYC if needed or when a big win comes to us then the casino will ask for documents for withdrawal approval.

Basically, we are still taking advantage of opportunities for users with small funds, so it won't be questioned for KYC, but if it's more than that, maybe we have to be prepared to give up everything the casino needs, so there's still no good solution because the government is still in control for a regulation on the casino.

Stake and some casinos are still a solution that does not ask for KYC because withdrawals are very small.

There's nothing wrong in providing KYC if you are asked to give the same (but by a reputed casino ofcourse).
I said this because sometimes, if we win big, we are asked for more info either to clarify their suspicion or to let them know that we don't belong to one of the site's restricted countries. I know that many of us are skeptical about providing any of our personal details to such casinos but most of the times we need to settle our mind and give our KYC docs to the website in order to get our funds released by them.

I think KYC is the trend now, so it is somehow difficult to not implement it since regulations are imposing that centralized casino must implement KYC for anti-money laundering.  I think if the casino wanted to implement KYC, they must implement it on the registration and before enabling deposit address so that a player can have a choice whether he will undergo KYC or not before playing.  That way player can avoid losing fund in relation to KYC issue.  This also solve the casino's problem of multi-accounting and other exploits done by users.

It is either implement KYC or not, if the casino wanted to implement KYC then do before the player is able to deposit funds.

No KYC is best except large withdrawals.

I'm not sure if there is a middle ground here:

If casinos are mandated by their regulators then obviously they will ask for KYC, simply as that. Perhaps you need to read between the line what @Efialtis. Maybe in the beginning they "will not enforce", so meaning there is a possibility that they will in the future.

And how many online casinos are going to survived without KYC? that is the big question.

KYC will be implemented in time, this is inevitable as the government tries to regulate everything that are related to cryptocurrency and with gambling, its slowly happening. I see no solution here aside from dealing with the best site only. I already provided my KYC on many good site and so far I’m still safe, I guess you just need to have a good wallet to protect yourself from any hacker because soon KYC will be one of the requirement to deal with crypto.

I do agree, every services that involved crypto here will always be KYC, from exchanges to casino because that will be law and by that it will be enforced.

Yes, there are also DEX in casino and same as exchanges, but they are not being supported, because it has limit and slow. And again, the similarity is the same. I do hope that that there should be certain threshold that the casino will do before asking our personal data. Because the thing right now is that casinos are asking for KYC is they flag an account regardless of the money they won (of course the bigger, the more it will attract KYC).

I guess before, online casinos are not asking for KYC even if you win big, they will readily give it to you once you withdraw.


It's different now, and for some casinos, initially they will not ask for KYC, but once you win big, the issues arises.

And that's what irked many gamblers, and with that said, I don't think their will be any ideal KYC solution. Casinos are going to hold your winnings if you don't pass your personal data to them. So you are somewhat trap and will be forced to send it just to withdraw your money.

I don't think there would be a balance here. sure, it would be great if the casino does not enforce their KYC but not all casinos will do this, at the end of the day, Casinos will protect and prioritize their interest over their gamblers.

I remember reading before on a Casino(I forgot which casino it was) that they have a certain threshold before they ask their gambler for KYC(of course as long as they don't find anything "suspicious" on the account).

^Definitely right and I agree with this.
Because KYC is always been there when it comes to gambling casino that is regulated once they have a license. Any platform that has related to any financial matters will always ask for this KYC, the thing is to choose the higher minimum withdrawal for the required KYC and also avoid asking for heavy requirements of KYC. So always be ready ourself for KYC because it is expected and there is no solution to avoid them.

First, I would like to say that this topic is best created on gambling discussion board, so it would be nice if it is moved there.

For me, any balance is OK to ask a user for kyc, I have kyced on big casinos like stake and the rest, on my own and with zero balance, I did not wait until the casino made the passing of kyc verification compulsory for me to continue using their platform.

KYC brings benefits to both the casino and the gamblers, one of those is that it protects the casino and the users from malicious users, also help to keep the rate of multiple accounting at its barest minimum.
I personally had never had any problems with kyc, but all I make sure of is this that I am not giving my documents to scammers, but rather, to a reputable company to enable me enjoy their services with limits.

Government would really be targeting out these platforms to impose up regulations and laws considering that they cant touch up cryptocurrency literally or technically which they would rather put up focus on

integrating it into these platforms thats why KYC and regulation becomes more tighter as the years passing by which it isnt really that surprising that we are experiencing these things.

Expect that on future years to come where these crypto casino will really be in default on asking out some verification before you could play or something that we could say
that it might really be ending up on being the same with those fiat casino which i wont really be shocked.

Yes, OP should move this to the gambling discussion board.
As we have seen, casinos and bookies with gambling license have kyc requirement in their ToS.
This is part of their compliance also to where they are licensed, so it is understandable that they need to put it in their Terms.
Some of them are not very strict when it comes to implementation, however, the user should always be prepared to submit
if in case he is playing on a casino which requires kyc.
In this regard, if you don't want any trouble, just play on a reputable casino, which you think you won't have problem submitting your kyc docs.

Exactly the point I was trying to make, I think the whole issue and argument in regards to kyc is because many gamblers want to gamble to make money but are not willing to release their identity, some times it makes me wonder how we all were able to play on the land casinos when online casinos was not yet a reality, do some of us have a ghost-mode switch which we press to turn off our real identity when we visit the land casinos?
Of course not, we visit there in and with our real identity, why now has it become a problem for us in the online version of casinos?

I believe no body is ever forced to using an untrusted casino, wherefore when they ask for documentation verification, we begin to panic for what they are going to use it for, if you are such a person, then just stick with the reputation casinos and have your kyc documents ready any time it is request, for the reputable casinos, you are sure that your documents won't be used for anything malicious outside the terms stated in the ToS.

The points i want to make here are,

1. If you play with small stakes, KYC is really annoying and likely to make you quit.

2. If you play big and win, the casino will think you are not a true player and ask for KYC.

3. If you want to withdraw the money you won, then why should a casino know your identity? Isn't KYC because of AML laws? What does winning at the casino have to do with money laundering?

4. There should be a cash out threshold in the casino that should trigger the need for KYC.

5. The KYC process itself is time consuming and will go on and on until you say ok enough already and leave this casino forever.

6. The casino will try to make you believe that KYC is a legal requirement, but it's not always the case.

7. Some casinos have no business asking for your identity and should not be allowed to do so. For example, unlicensed and unregulated casinos.

When it comes to KYC two things are involved.
1: the casino, it is within its right of operations to ask for KYC at regular intervals or as a prerequisite for opening an account with them.
2: the player, who is the client also has the right to either look away from KYC compliance casinos or give up the documents for verification and risk losing their privacy.
So it is clear which step to take to avoid unsatisfactory results for both the casino and the players.

In an era like this, kyc is a trend almost required in any platform that something to do with fiat. That's why users tend to submit their info like it is nothing special, and no harm will happen like i always read in any kyc concern thread.

If we're talking of kyc preferred triggers, maybe only to those "legit" suspicious activity detected and a certain higher withdrawals, nothing else. This setup works in some reputed casino why not it is not followed to those new casino as well? Or to all casino.

I believe that there are physical casinos that aren't collecting any ID from their gamblers. Though I believe that there will be a limit into this, I'm just not really sure how much is the average number of dollars being cash out for the casino to ask some identification. I played and watched on physical casino but I haven't any experience collecting some identification, Maybe my wins and the person I watched didn't win that big for the casino ask for our identification.

It's that people want the casino they are playing to be non-KYC or has a little percentage that they are collecting KYC. KYC is a big hassle let's be honest and it's one of the reason why people want to avoid it.

I guess there is no solution for this matter. Regulators demand KYC, casinos have no choice besides implementing KYC feature on their platforms under risk of being forbidden from operating if they do the opposite. That is how it works to have your business working legitimately, by the rules. In my opinion that is just a formality, because there are unregulated websites so trustful or even more trustful than regulated websites. And we could even mention cases of regulated services, which ask for KYC, that have already scammed their users. So, to be regulated and to ask KYC don't mean you are safe, as user.

But that is how most services currently work on the internet and we have to follow their rules strictly or give up having access to the services they offer.

I guess a good balance would be to be completely transparent with KYC triggers. It is understandable from the point of view of a gambler that crypto casino nowadays could require KYC. When exactly would that arise? Many don't know. And many casinos suddenly require KYC from a clueless gambler, a gambler who doesn't know what triggered it. I noticed explanations are normally very hazy. They're not specific. They just go along the line of "we noticed suspicious activities from your account." I mean, that's apparently insufficient and should be invalid.

Also, it's always a bit sneaky of a casino to only require KYC upon withdrawal even if violations are already done earlier. Sign up is allowed, deposits are done, games are played, but when the jackpot is won, the casino would suddenly inform the user that he/she shouldn't have even be allowed to bet. Or something like this.

Yes many of us likes to remain anonymous. So many of us prefers no KYC casinos. I know there are many terms and conditions goes on a gambling site regarding KYC, but if you want users to be happy and calm, then you need to listen to the users demand. You can keep certain rules and regulations on site, and if any user breaks it, then ask him/her KYC. Nevertheless not all non KYC casinos are good, as they don’t have a proper license etc. So always play on sites which has good reputation and feedbacks. I myself playing at stake.com from the past 5 years or more and withdrawn huge amount of money. They haven’t asked me for KYC not even for a single withdraw.

From the user side:
1. If they want to play in a licensed casino, then they very likely have to go through KYC.
2. There aren't many privacy coins, so they will have to limit the number of coins they can play with. Bitcoin and most other crypto currencies aren't anonymous.
3. I am sure if it is a well known casino, they can easily trust their documents with them. And most casino uses third party services to provide user verification services.

From casino point of view:

They don't actually have much options here. If they decide to get a license, then they will have to KYC users. If they don't get a license and provides users gambling services, they might get into trouble and the users too. KYC helps both the casino and the players to be safe.

Ok so I'm assuming here the problem is the existence of "KYC" itself, users don't want it, and some casinos HAVE to have it due to laws and regulations, so technically speaking there's no method whatsoever to satisfy both parties since, well, they both want it. There may be no KYC casinos out there but most of the famous ones do have it and are required.

If they were to meet in the middle, then the current system would probably be the best, only KYC based on specific conditions. Now, this is abused by some casinos but can easily be fixed by being public with their findings (which some casinos don't really do), and being REALLY specific so that the bloody argument could be done and over with just one single talk. Crypto being used to trace and track could probably be helpful.

KYC seems here to stay already even the decentralized casinos that are yet not asking for KYC may actually ask if they are sanctioned. There is Betfury and the likes, I think they are not asking KYC AFAIK but until when?

Crypto is regulated. We're likely not going to escape this regulation unless you completely isolate yourself to a close crypto community with unknown coin.

Sooner or later people will understand the need of this KYC obligation  , it may not appear for now or the following year but surely in the future this will be implemented in every casino online or else they will be run down by government that wanted to take part of their income lol.
so KYC or not ? lets live with it or understand its function from now so we will only enjoy our gaming without any issues soon.

I prefer crypto casinos without KYC. And in fact, although I have tried a few of them, I have never been asked for KYC. It also has to do with the fact that I don't bet large amounts, and in some of these casinos the ToS talk about KYC requirements above certain amounts.

I think that if KYC requirements become generalised in the future and it happens like in fiat casinos, cryptocurrency casinos will lose a large part of their appeal and their business.

Limitations for non-KYC.
How much amount? Country-based limitations, we have different amounts on how much it will be triggered. This will be a lot of work for a gambling platform but there is no solution here that would benefit both sides.
Online gambling companies that will offer non-KYC will be cornered by their government and might even be sued for money laundering.
Gamblers don't want their identity out.
So, that's the only solution I can think of. You can gamble as non-KYC but if you hit the limit then you cannot play again until it is refreshed.

Well, it’s hard to disclose our personal information online but what else can we do, in no time all centralized exchanges will require KYC particularly for those big winners who are able to win such huge amounts. So it’s either leave the casino and not to gamble anymore, or just give the casino staff our personal details. So there’s no solution to KYC, but to accept it that it will be here for good, and there’s no way escaping it.

I prefer a solution where you do not have to identify yourself, if you do not withdraw a lot of money on a frequent basis. A money launderer needs to deposit money into casinos, then use as little money as possible and then withdraw it onto the "legal" financial system with frequent withdraws.

Most "real" gamblers will deposit money.... play with most of it... and then only withdraw when they hit something big. So casinos should use technology to identify money laundering activities and then block people's accounts that has been flagged for it. (Only then ask for KYC information)

It is normal that every centralized casino will ask you for KYC.  Because they set up their physical office and operate the casino, they never want any money laundering or any other illegal activity through their platform, so they always require kyc from the user so that anyone doing any illegal activity can be brought to justice as soon as possible. But if a platform doesn't ask you for KYC and they claim that they are a good centralized casino platform then consider it a fraud cycle so double check before investing there.

You're not comfortable being asked to provide KYC on a casino? choose reputable zero KYC casino like Freebitco, don't use brand new created zero KYC casino since it's high risk of the casino isn't trustworthy.

It doesn't make sense if you want to play on mandatory KYC casino but doesn't want to provide KYC if they want to ask you because they feel suspicious on your account. KYC is really needed for licensed casino that run many promotions, they need to prevent from multiple accounts or abusers.

Come to think of it, online casinos should be the last to ask users for KYC verification, imagine winning billions of dollars and the platform has your national identity card or NIN number, you are not that safe if we start talking about the danger present here.

the problem is not in KYC itself, the problem is how this law is unfair and in a way puts people at risk, for example if the law said the following: every online casino will be obliged to put who owns the casino and also the real contacts about the casino such as: phone number, email, social networks so that people would already know that the owner of the casino is person X, there is his phone number, address where he lives, his social networks and casino phone number and casino social networks and email address and with that anyone would feel comfortable doing KYC in that casino

let's be honest, who is happy to give away documents on an anonymous site? no physical address why can't the customer be anonymous but the owner of the casino can be anonymous? How is this and combating money laundering? Could it be that money laundering cannot be fought if a person creates a casino? casino owner can't launder money? this KYC law is unfair and meaningless in my opinion


this is also another problem, you don't know who owns the casino. you don't know if they are undercover criminals or not, and you can earn millions and the casino owners themselves can go steal from you, they know your identity, or they can sell your identity to some criminal and that criminal goes there to steal from you, that KYC issue is very poorly done in my opinion

I will echo the sentiments of most of our posters here, it can't be prevented in this era. We have moved to a point that everything, including crypto base online casinos are going to ask for KYC. That what the world we live in right now, our identity will have to be known to them specially if we are winning huge amount of money.

So before they are going to pay, they want to record everything first, as government has also mandated that before they will be given their license to operate, they will have to pass KYC first. That's how it is and so there is no solution but to follow what they requested and submit ourselves to KYC procedures.

I will refrain of speaking of which when you don't have enough data or statistics about this. I know some users shared their experience here the same as you described, so matic they are labeled as money launderer?

If "real gamblers" will used "most" of its deposits, then how about those who used the partial, quarter of their deposits? Also those who used all of their deposits. What should be they called?

The point is why labeling someone as real or not real gambler or what ever you call it just because they don't want to bet their whole deposits, quarter of it or all of it. There is no requirement of being a gambler soon as you gamble, you are a gambler, also for a money launderer. Any launderer can do both or any options mentioned, as long the money were from any crime then send it to gambling sites, its already laundering, whatever he does to that money.

"Balance" is looking for a solution that's impossible with the current system of centralized services, using a decentralized cryptocurrency. You will always be entrusting your coins into the custody of another entity. There will never be a perfect balance in such a system, merely trade-offs, and often times it will be more advantageous the casino because they hold your money.

I believe the only solution that would be advantageous for the user was something like DirectBet's system. No accounts needed, no deposits and withdrawals necessary, everything done through blockchain, https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=393147.0

Users are okay with the KYC because with the centralized system and government it is impossible to run a casino with no KYC when the regulators wants them to do. So the solution is just keeping it simple not really deep sensitive information shouldn't be collected until they reach certain wagering and withdrawing limits so a normal user can pass through the hurdles with ease.

  - This is just from my observation, I noticed that other casinos require KYC but they look for a lot besides personal documents, others do not require KYC but when the amount of money released on their gambling platform suddenly asks for KYC, and even though it has been given, they still ask for a video call to confirm if they are the ones on the ID for validation, besides saying that the database record was suddenly erased, are such scenarios not allowed to release the big winnings of a gambler.

Can't just a simple KYC like providing a valid ID or passport would be enough as if there is no hassle for a gambler?

Whether you like it or not, we will be asked to do KYC, regardless of the limit we crossed, because every casino can change the limit anytime.
Maybe casinos can now set a $10k or even more, but if the government asks them to lower the limit, the casinos have to comply.
While crypto users like casinos that don't implement KYC, they should also be aware that one day KYC may become a necessity in casinos.
KYC that doesn't use too many details won't be a problem for users.

KYC in Cryptocurrency casinos is something that you cannot avoid because like you said because of the license requirement I'm OK with doing KYC this is an industry practice its a way to safeguard the casino and its users as well, an ideal KYC solution should be a much higher withdrawal threshold so that only whales and those high stakes bettors  and those suspect for money laundering will be asked KYC protecting the majority of gamblers who are small players, of course, gamblers should prefer to be KYCed by reputable casinos

KYC/AML procedures in crypto casinos are a necessary evil, as they prevent fraudulent activity by scam artists and money launderers. However, many people who play at crypto casinos do not like having to comply with KYC/AML rules because they don't trust online casinos with their personal information and worry about the security of their data. This is completely understandable. People have reservations about divulging information about themselves to online services. And even fewer people trust the security of their data with an online casino. Some people say that KYC is essential for preventing fraud and crime in the space, but that's not necessarily true. There are plenty of examples where institutions have been breached by hackers and the information leaked, and there are also many cases where the data has been used for malicious purposes.

This was a fun read, thanks all for the replies. I'm trying to figure out how to move this in to the discussion sub, will do it soon.


I was actually enjoying their story and the whole first page of that thread, but then after I start looking at the most recent replies I saw that they are out of business. I'm not sure how a system like that can function, especially if it's run by a smaller team. But nevertheless, it seemed like an interesting idea.


You personally aren't the problem, it's the abusers. The matrix, the KYC matrix isn't triggered on every little thing that happens within the casino. Some companies like Betsson have a 1000+ variable matrix that finds out abusers, some of them trigger on smaller steps, other on larger, it really depends on the users track record with the casino.


 

we have different ways and different idea but for me it's better to have or to do a KYC if you are a big gamblers it because you have the assurance that your money will safe and have a big chance to withdraw it but the KYC must be simple and that that strict but like me as a small gambler then it's okay to not or to don't asked about kyc as it was a small amount from my pocket and have a small money in withdrawal.

Since they know that highroller will need to submit KYC docs, they'd better be stealth under the radar instead and just gamble right just the border amount where the casino will not require them to fill KYC. That's one way to avoid KYC.

I'm actually not sure how much is what they consider highroller where they mandate to submit KYC? $50K? 

The user can play without giving KYC as long as they won't trigger the threshold and though the gambling site may require users to do KYC even if they won't hit the threshold if they are showing shady bets or trying to take advantage on the gambling site. You are right about the KYC it was mandatory for gambling site that has a license.

So to make it short, there's always a consequence.

From the research that I did most of them range between 1 BTC and 3 BTC, it depends on the casino. Some claim even 4, but those weren't licensed to begin with, so I have no clue.

Personally I don't think bad with KYC in gambling casino because right now have been usual habit submitting KYC every where actually as trader in cryptocurrency. Almost exchange market need to used KYC if want trader, deposit and withdraw fund, I don't think any problem yet with several casino gambling acquire with KYC document.

Some one heavy with KYC procedure can finding with casino gambling not required with KYC for withdrawing, deposit and playing in there gambling site. I found in Bitcointalk tread explaining with all casino trusted gambling site have free playing without submit KYC and some one disagree with KYC can get source link for playing in casino gambling not require with KYC.

There’s no way to make another round just to make both party happy at the end. KYC is vital factor for AML because crypto casino is always subjected by a money laundering which the KYC for AML purposes. The only way for a user that didn’t want KYC to become happy with the AML policy is to avoid gambling casino that has ToS stated about the  possible KYC.

There’s a lot of decentralized casino that doesn’t have any threat of possible KYC, the only difference was the popular game provider on both slot and live games is not available on this casino since most games in here are using blockchain to determine the results. 3rd party games usually only available on centralized casino that always subject on KYC. This is the cons on avoiding KYC because we can’t insist our rights to demand KYC on casino that is just following the law.
 

To me i see an ideal solution to kyc related issues as very simple thing to do, if you're a gambler that wouldn't mind going through kyc then try all means to maintain only the ones that requires kyc and make sure you adhere to their regular requirements for it, such will involve verifying your account band occasional check on your profile to know if you had not been bye passing their rules, ass for those who think the whole thing is as a crap of complications to their personal policy and choice then they should always try to avoid gambling sites that requires kyc, just as simple as this.

It is very good if you can gamble on any platform without KYC because gambling platforms often sell their customer's kyc info for various illegal activities if the site is a scam site. So avoiding KYC is a great thing.  But if you want to gamble on a trusted and big casino site then you must do kyc verification on that site.  Because they always provide security to customers and try to prevent all illegal activities . So doing KYC on those sites is no problem

I don't think that there's a solution for that. Casinos that ask KYC will always stop gamblers to withdraw their balance until they passed the KYC which it's purpose is entirely about AML. The problem with that is even though a gambler won huge amount and wanted to withdraw and yet they still ask KYC when you can check the gambler's record when that person won in that bet. As far as I noticed, those who open an accusation thread is that the person who won provided an information about the winning bet and yet the casino ask for KYC to withdraw (some cases not get paid until they open a scam accusation).

To make it a bit longer, of course there is a consequence but the threshold should be marked clearly instead of vaguely. I find that most casinos are desperate when it comes to following regulations and using the KYC to their own benefit.

But these online gambling casinos do not provide any clear cut definitions of when, how and why they do their KYC. So users feel left in the dark and dislike the element of surprise because they thought they would never have to do KYC.

Also, define "shady bets"

The main problem with KYC right now is the locked funds on user deposits... I think casinos should keep the users' money if they fail in the KYC process because that is like stealing their funds. If a user fails in the KYC process then the casino should send the money back, and then block the account. But it's just my point of view.

Another solution could be to request the KYC to let the user make a deposit. That would be fair for all and people will not lose their money with a KYC problem.

Truth be told that it is easy for this casinos a d if they have theei full way, they would also prefer to follow suit with all that pleases their esteemed customers and wouldn't want to so anything to trigger their anger.
I know in most cases, tye casinos seem to lure some of their players with a no KYC policy and end up asking for a KYC along the line which is very bad and mostly on withdrawals.
One of the greatest challenges with KYC is the pains of withdrawal decline as a result of KYC after been told of a no KYC policy.
One of tye ways to handle this, is to publicly let your users decide if to get engaged with doing KYC rather than luring them and KYC should be asked on withdrawals above a certain amount and not on every little withdrawal.

The KYC is a factor that indicates to me that it is to have control and where there is control over people, many players do not like it because they do not like them to know their data, but it is something that must be complied with, I have thought that this is the It is an easier way for governments to control people who ignore their taxes and who do not like to appear, for this reason I analyze that KYC has a lot behind what they are looking for, it is not good for anything, I have learned that cryptocurrencies and bitcoin were made to avoid controls of all kinds and here through KYC is a shameless way of knowing people's data when they need it.

KYC must have been created for regulation purposes or to catch fraudsters. If they fail on the KYC, that could mean that they are guilty for doing some crimes. Now, will we still return the money to them? I don't think it's a good idea. They will just ran away and do another attempt in other casinos. for those who didn't commit a crime but only do some violations, I think it's also fine to confiscate their funds. This should act as a way to discipline their behaviours.

Now if they don't want this to happen then they must play according to the rules. If there is a problem with KYC, that is it is being implemented here in crypto when crypto is supposed to be decentralized and free from regulations.

Let's not forget that asking for KYC can also put off many customers. I think most people don't have much of a problem with providing this info, but it's more about how gambling sites handle the data. If you wanted to be honest, you should do a KYC the moment someone creates an account on a site. Then you also know for sure that you will not get into problems with a double account and you can destroy those kinds of accusations.

When you register with certain casino they never do mention about the kyc. They allow us to deposit int casino without kyc. They allow us to play the gambling without the kyc. After we earn good money from the deposit money, we have an idea to withdraw the full money. But they delay the withdrawal process by mentioning the kyc as mandatory to withdraw of money. In that mean time we will used 50-70 percentage in continuous betting. This will get you additional winnings apart from the old winnings.

Or just face the reality that everything demands KYC right now, not only in gambling but also in opening your bank account, registering to favorite app in the internet, or even when simply participating in a raffle draw, lol of course KYC is a must. However, if you are not comfortable with KYC, I guess you’re free to gamble in shady areas but don’t expect that you can easily withdraw your huge amount of winnings.

Which is I think what many casinos are doing already, they know that if they asked to every single one of their players to give their personal information to them they will lose a great deal of their clients, so the best solution for them is to only ask for this information to those that are gambling big amounts of money in their casino and leave the small gamblers alone, now this is bad for those which have a lot of money to spare in their gambling hobby, but I do not think there is a way for licensed casinos to avoid asking this information out of them.

Legitimate online casinos require KYC since they need to comply with the law. There are regions and countries that don't allow gambling, if you are running a legitimate business you will do your best to comply and not to break any law to avoid any legal consequences. Some are against KYC for privacy purposes, but let's face it, No KYC is being abused and even minors are opting to go to online casinos since there's no way to verify their age if KYC is not required.

A reasonable trigger threshold would be a good solution, although apart from that I can't think of anything else. They cannot really compromise with the government on what they say they will do in terms of KYC, as for sure this is still monitored by the government they are under on. Perhaps they can be more forgiving on new users re: KYC and only ask for kne when they reached a certain amount before they need to submit documents. For existing users I guess if there is an irregularity, or if a user wins beyond a certain limit, that is when the second round of KYC should be given, otherwise let it be voluntary.

Casino will be two types, One is Casino without the kyc. Most of the decentralised crypto currency will not kyc. Because they want the money flow in their casino. So they no need about the Kyc. It doesn’t mean, they are going to scam us. Since it’s very new one, they need attention to the project. For such kyc reason, they making some money easy to withdraw also. When the second one is using KYC, they will made the license for the people who involved to our crypto currency. The gambling without kyc will reach the most of the people.

The current solution that some casinos have is already good IMO since their verification process would have several levels and as you've mentioned they have certain triggers for it. They're trying to adapt the solutions from exchanges but I don't see any better way to improve or balance it even further since not all casinos can avoid it permanently as I know that some casinos that didn't use to do KYC suddenly introduced some sort of rule recently.

I think the best solution is no KYC, no custody, no accounts period...  You should be able to use the blockchain for bets and have everything settled on chain.  Double spends took down the only online casino that ever attempted to operate this way (directbet.eu) but it was glorious while it lasted.  There was no way to make a deposit so that removed the concern of having your funds stolen in a hack.  Everything was viewable on chain so you knew that things were operating as expected and bets were immediately settled.  A shame that someone took advantage of double spends to cause the owner to walk away.

Honestly, even if we propose something balanced here, what else we can do if KYC now becomes a must requirement for a gambling site? No choice but to follow or leave that site if anyone is not interested and feel comfortable on doing so. For me, as long as KYC will only be required in certain activities that a user can trigger their alarm, that would be fine.

As for my own approach, if KYC will really be mandated, I will study first the KYC terms of that site. From there, my decision to play on that site will depend on how the term goes. Besides, I'm open to comply with KYC for a gambling site that I'm using for long.

On the other hand, if it's about complying KYC with other sites that I rarely used to or those who are new to business, I will refrain from using them unless I saw something "special" that can lure me on that site.

Perhaps the best solution is to accept KYC for good because it’s where it’s definitely going to. And to think that gambling platforms are manipulated by the centralized government, then everything their orders should be followed, and KYC should be strict implemented. Although there are some casinos who only ask KYC when there are huge amount of winnings, but it’s expected that in the long run, KYC will always be compulsory by any means.

The same with the exchanges that has to force KYC, they can limit their users into different tiers for which those that don't want KYC can still play with them but with lower features and perks with their accounts. But regardless of that and they say that they won't be requiring any kyc even in the future, don't trust them blindly because they can be forced to do that as you've said about the regulators pushing them in doing so. They can't do anything with that even if they want to balance it together with their players, they just can't go against the regulators that has the control to their business and can be halted anytime.

There will be no solution for this, KYC will be implemented and it will serve its purpose.
You can avoid these platforms asking for your KYC as much as you want but sooner or later, other site will also implement this one. Being anonymous here only applies if you are not using any centralized platform and remain an anonymous investors. If the regulatory agency started to make pressure on exchanges and casinos, probably they will comply right away or else they will not be allowed to operate.

Personally, it’s best to just comply whatever the casino require us to do so, if they ask for KYC, then we should do it willingly. Because in less than a year or two, everything will be asking for KYC not only in gambling casinos but also in other areas wherein KYC is a must too. So instead of trying to be anonymous to retain our privacy, why not just follow the rules and comply with KYC. Otherwise, you won’t be allowed to gamble at all.

If we dont have any choice then we would really be trying out to accept on whats the reality in front of us which it is something inevitable but we know that there are really that still casinos or platforms
which doesnt still ask out for some KYC and this is where people do flock out and be playing on these platforms since they could still able to play anonymously.
If you've been get stucked with those funds of yours and requiring some KYc then its up to your own choice whether you would be complying or
totally accept out that those funds or money had been lost totally.

One thing that I could think of when there's a KYC is because it involves money laundering and if these establishment using Banks they will implement the KYC sooner or later especially if there's a huge cash flows. They want to know everything and I think it's part of the rules that they want to list everything in a ledger.

So, if you don't like a casino asking for KYC then, don't play on their casino because no matter what you do to avoid their KYC you'll still going to do the KYC somehow once you win or try to withdraw your funds on their casino.

Before you choose KYC casino, you need to read the whole TOS first, you will find KYC mandatory rule and they can ask it in anytime. I think the reason why choose a KYC casino is you're already trust with that casino, I think when you already trust on that casino, you should trust anything that you submit to that casino too. This can be your username, password, email, IP address, Bitcoin address etc. Actually if you've link your Bitcoin address and IP address from your centralized exchange, the casino could know your identity if they ask the centralized exchange. You must have submitted your KYC to centralized exchange right?

Maybe that's what we can do if the casino asks us to do KYC at any time because we already use the casino and get comfortable playing gambling.
But not all gamblers will voluntarily want to do KYC because surely some will be disappointed to see that their favorite casino has now asked them to do it.
Maybe they will move and look for other casinos that do not implement KYC so they can continue to gamble anonymously.
We should think about it before deciding, but as long as we use a trusted casino, I don't think there will be any problems for the members.

3BTC is a bit small for suspecting money laundering but maybe if the value is sky-high it would be fair. Regulation is really here and we can't keep things unregulated since it's always the way before innovations are adopted for all.

My question is just that are we just too naive to think this regulation would be good for us and crypto and that giving up our privacy is worth it?

Perhaps it would be good to have a single, super secure platform and potentially using some sort of Blockchain/nft solution to store documents - that could be used to validate whether someone has genuine documents. Maybe where different sources could give ratings, maybe whether certain ratings might hold extra weight (document was verified in-person). But to keep the anonymity side it would have to be somehow decentralised or in a jurisdiction that would not force documents to be disclosed.

This is reality mate if you will trust your casino then you should agree all the rules and regulations in that particular casino like KYC if they ask you a KYC then it's okay it because you trust your casino. But before you choose your casino make it sure that casino is reputable enough to be trusted. Because if you choose trusted casino you will be comfortable with enough to do anything and also you are comfortable enough to give your information.

   - You know dude, first of all, we can't do anything if a casino has any rules, because we as gamblers have no other choice but to follow the rules they have if we want to continue gambling on their gambling platform, that's it and that's easy to understand.

Now, if other gamblers don't want KYC, it's still their choice whether they want to gamble there or not. All I know is that when a casino is in a regulated industry, it's normal for them to ask for KYC from their clients or users. And even though it is not regulated, the casino still has the right if they still want to ask for KYC.

Each casino has to run their rules and the users have to deal with it. It's either they will take it or leave it. In some instances, players just complay with the KYC to continue playing on the site. As long as the site has a good reputation, I don't think KYC should be feared. I'm sure that they will never ruin their reputation by leaking their player's personal details. KYC is getting mandatory nowadays and we should just have to deal with it.

There is no solution to it.

Just be aware of their rules before signing it and these days, most of them are likely to ask you kyc for whatever reasons they want to say. Accept the fact that the governments can no longer be cool by not having these casinos ask for kycs.

They've got their reasons, the casino has got reasons and we also got our reasons whether we will continue signing up and gambling with them or not.

As a gambler, we all know that KYC is required by most gambling platforms and there's no way to avoid it. KYC is required for compliance, to avoid money laundering and any abuse. It's better to read their TOS regarding KYC as in some gambling platforms KYC isn't mandatory unless you hit a certain amount of deposit/withdrawal and if there's any suspicious activity while using their platform (cheating or abuse).

Casino's rules are always the ones to be followed, never the players, if the player doesn't want to undergo KYC, they are always free to leave and find some other place that doesn't require them to do so. Honestly I am in support of it, the fact that it gives you some sense of safety because at the very least everyone who gambles in that site did the same thing as you and is subject to the extent of laws you are subjected to as well should one of them decide to mess with you or your account. I don't roll with no KYC because it's a bit iffy for me, sometimes even scary because if I could easily gamble and withdraw, this means that when I get hacked the hacker would have no trouble getting all my funds.

I have always said that the best way to go on with KYC is that you could ask for it if there is a problem. If there are no problems, and the money is low, and there is no big wins, the idea to ask for it makes no sense to me. Let's say I deposited 100 dollars somewhere, wagered around 2k dollars, and lost my 100 dollars and now I have nothing, why would the casino need my KYC for this?

There are some casinos that ask for it upfront, you don't know if I will even wager yet, just calm down. This is why ask for it if there is a need to ask, but if there are no needs and nothing is going on then there is also no reason to ask for it neither.

Generally I'm not a supporter of KYC/AML, but if to choose from gambling sites which require KYC immediately or which require it when they want, I would rather choose the first option, because after passing this procedure I would have more confidence that after making a deposit casino they will not have questions about who I am and where I got my money.

Naturally I m not against kyc and for me kyc is the best because to avoid thefts and money laundering. Besides as a gambler one thing you must do is to get your identity verification ready as those sites may request for kyc. Now why are you afraid, did you stole any funds or do some Billion dollars and why should kyc be a thing of talk or though time.

For now, lets just cherish up those casinos which does still not ask out for some KYC on the time that we do make out some registration, but you should not really remove into your mind that
they could really be able to ask out anytime according into their likings and this is always been the case which they could really make out some alibis that you had violated the terms and conditions
or they had noticed something shady in regarding with your betting behavior.Its really that something we gamblers cant really be able to resist nor avoid on what government is trying
to monitor out and these business are to follow because if they dont then we know on what would gonna happen.There's indeed no solution into this but rather
better make yourself able to get deal with this.

I also don't support KYC as I worry about my personal data however if I'll be given a choice to choose between gambling platforms that require KYC upon registration or only require it once needed, then I would rather choose the latter part instead. With all the number of gambling platforms rising right now, I want to experience most of them and try it out for myself, but I don't think providing my data to all these platforms are necessary just to test it.

For me, it is much better to be asked for a KYC once needed to and not while signing up.

We, fair players, are at risk if we have to go through the KYC procedure in each casino and leave our personal and sensitive info on each of those sites.
KYC is full of flaws, it didn't prevent money laundering and theft before, and it won't work now in the crypto. So I don't feel that I'm "more" protected if a site has mandatory KYC, and I don't think it's in the spirit of crypto.

The ideal KYC solution is what we have now, we can play without KYC in many casinos, and as long as we are playing fair nobody will ask anything. But suspicious activities should trigger KYC. Definitely, it should be clear what is "suspicious activity" is, we all know that some sites dispute big winnings that way and don't pay them out. Just saying that someone is suspicious shouldn't be enough, but even that is a tricky part because of confidentiality they can't share sensitive info. So whom to trust in the end if we don't know everything we need to know?

I think it's because we play gambling using crypto, where crypto is about the anonymity of each user. So those who gamble using crypto expect casinos not to implement KYC on their premises. But it seems that it is difficult at the moment because the government wants to participate in monitoring and wants to know who is gambling using crypto. But we have to be prepared if the casinos ask us to do KYC one day and if we don't want to, we can only look for other casino sites.

So, same like there are payment providers like CoinsPaid, that generate the address and sort out the payments between the casino and the user, you think that it would be smart to have a "KYC provider" that would be a third-party body that would KYC everyone, and then regardless of the casino you're playing, it would state that you're KYC-ed?

It sounds interesting, but then we would again end up with the same question "when to KYC", just on the KYC providers side.

But THERE IS a solution, just like Bitcoin was designed to give the user the capability to go around regulations, building a casino to process its transactions directly onchain can also give the casinos the same regulation-avoiding capabilities. 8)

DirectBet was a true onchain Bitcoin casino. The was user never requires to make an account, or required to make a deposit. Everything was done onchain. Although, it was slow and inefficient during high network congestion. I would like to see it built on "faster" blockchains, like Litecoin/Dogecoin.

Casino hands are tied up because of the regulation even if they want to give what the community wants, they cannot do it, because their license issuer will not let them, and they have to comply with what their license issuer asks them to do with their players, the best options or bargain for users is to play on casino with a good reputation, a casino where your sensitive information is safe and they are compliant to the authority when it comes to asking KYC FOR their users, casinos are centralized and regulated they function that way to protect their casino and their users.

Doing KYC will depend on the limits set by the casino. Maybe the casino has set an amount for each member and if they cross that limit, the casino will ask them to do KYC. It could be possible that we will have a third party that will handle KYC issues and it's not done by casinos anymore but the problem is it's not easy to set up everything. Moreover, there will be a significant cost factor to set up and people who work as third parties must really work hard to ensure all user data will be safe from things they don't want.

Unfortunately there is no other option that makes any sense for the gamblers, as much as we would like for this to not be the case it is not possible anymore, the gambling industry is huge and the governments cannot afford to ignore it anymore, especially now that they need all the money they can get due to the difficult economic circumstances they are facing, now some gamblers may try their luck with unlicensed casinos but that decision has its own fair share of problems.

I prefer the kyc verification because KYC we make you 2 protect whatever do you have in that particular platform some people does not like the way she because they feel that kyc verification will give them stress why kyc verification for any platform is for the benefit of the boat party because of mismanagement or lost of funds that is why I do value care while she forget about the stress or the requirement of it but everyone who is into gambling supposed to know that the kyc is very important

I do not think that there is a middle ground in a solution for KYC. In fact, KYC is already the middle-ground of cryptocurrency casinos to operate in this kind of field.

The reason on why KYC is implemented is due to the mandate of the government for its regulation among its users. With the nature of online gambling, the streamline of revenue is significantly huge that there is unrealized profit in the part of the government if the casino is not registered. The reason on why KYC was implemented is in order to receive the revenue and regulate the users on their spending habits.

Since cryptocurrencies cannot be controlled or regulated, this is the most regulation that the government could implement. While it may be a hindrance to most people, this is the only solution and middle-ground created by the government.

We know on whats the usage of taxes and this is where government do really try to snip out as much as possible with businesses and knowing on how big or profitable gambling business is then its not surprising that

they would be trying out to impose much stricter rules and laws for them just to snip out revenue or taxes with this businesses which these operators cant really be having any choice but to follow it.

Us users would be the ones will really be suffering on this one and as long there are platforms which doesnt ask out some kyc then we would really be
using it as much as we could for now, but i wont be surprised on what it looks like in the future.

Have same stand here mate , because i tend to hide my personality over online gambling because by any chance this will hurt our personal matter maybe not sooner but in the future as there are abuse coming.

this will lose large part and I think we will going back to casino establishment where there are no details needed but to deposit and withdraw by chips.
if we are talking of legit site then yes KYC  is better but for those new site or those being accused of scamming? then i will never deal with kyc and that site itself.

That's so true, but try to tell that to Sweden and Poland, they are still a hard nut to crack, they just don't want to open up for this industry :/ Maybe once this generation of politicians exchange. 

True but there are some situation when the casinos doesn't have a say on how the KYC was leaked like when the casino get attacked by hackers and things are been stolen like customers funds and data. Some hacker target this platforms as they know they hold data of many users and this can be used to harm this individual directly or sold on dark web for profit.

KYC should always be feared and shoudn't be summited to anyhow platforms you don't feel safe using. Always evaluation the casino before trusting them to safeguard your private information. Not many platform has this capacity to safeguard customer information as many are poorly built.

the solution is in each of us, I as a gambler actually I don't really like having to provide a photo of our identity or proof of billing our account to the casino site, I'm also not a big gambler just a small gambler so there's no problem just filling in the data to get level 1 on stake.com I can withdraw money without having to give my identity there, usually I will look for KYC which is not too complicated and has high limits without having to provide our identity, so far as I know stake.com is better enough to even withdraw hundreds dollar was not asked for any identity

Then maybe they should limit the informations they are seeking for KYC to set limit on both ends such as not including important information that could endanger the life of the player or only submitting pictures with watermarks of the gambling site they are playing at(just to somehow know where leak happened; problem is tendencies of editing or removing watermarks). KYC is not important to some people but others would put an eye into it especially those 'big' personalities who are playing in online gambling casinos. Given that there is a split with compliance, a waiver would somehow work stating that if a player won't submit KYC, then the site won't be liable with any problems that may happen to players' asset. Last option I guess to provide security to both ends; engage only on gambling sites which are registered or licensed.

Well, what can you say if they are not like that?. I didn't read somewhere on the site that they are on-chain. Most of the casinos I know are not like that where you deposited any amount but your account already have balance meanwhile the transaction is not yet confirmed or the site requires more than 1 confirmation needed before the balance is there. Many gambling sites use that method so that their gamblers won't have to wait for confirmations before their balance shows up in their account and in withdrawals won't be a problem since it's going to the gambler's wallet.

Casinos rarely tell the truth about what is going on in their business and keep it all to themselves. If they are required to explain, they will not go into detail because it concerns the situation at their casino. But usually, there will be people who will say what happened to the casino but we won't know who they are or their motives. From there, casinos want to open up about what's going on in their business.

We as gamblers, need to be aware of who has done KYC at the casino because this concerns the data we submitted to the casino. We certainly don't want to see our data being misused by hackers and even selling the data to other parties. A reputable casino can protect all customer data, including keeping their finances from being taken by hackers.

I think the best would be to set up an amount,a minimum amount that they must ask for KYC before proceeding your withdrawal.I am in favor of 10.000 dollars as in developed countries that is a maximum of three minimum to average salaries and everybody can have that amount,of course we are in crypto and the privacy is extremely loved by all the crypto guys,I also don't think criminals would be laundering money in such low amounts (hopefully I am not giving them an idea here  ;D) so that would be my ideal solution.

Of course the casino may low that amount as a minimum monthly salary in developed countries like 2000-3000 dollars and then asking KYC,for whales I fully agree KYC is super needed.

Unfortunately some casinos are using KYC as an excuse to gather user data and use it for their own commercial purposes. Data which has high value on the international data markets. Take Stake.com for example who operate within the legal jurisdiction of Curacao:


> They have no legal requirement to gather players data,* the law in curacao does not currently require them to gather players data.

> The data they do gather has no legal protection, if there are laws of data protection relating to your personal jurisdiction, stake can circumvent those laws by transferring the data to a country where it has no legal protection.

> Stake.com offer no guarantees of safety for that data and accept no responsibility for what happens to it after you send it to them.

> Buried in their privacy statement Stake.com state that they collect data for the purpose of using players data to increase profit levels and also admit an intention to offer that data to any potentially interested parties** (at a price I assume).

At any time they can effectively hold your funds as ransom until you send them data of high commercial value, data which they can do with as they like. Once it is in their data base they can hold on to it for ever, irrespective of any requests you may submit for its removal.



*Jurisdiction
Stake is not a financial institution within the meaning of applicable law of Curaçao and is accordingly not directly subject to the statutes and regulations applicable to certain financial institutions, -https://stake.com/policies/

**Collection Purposes
To create aggregate data about Members through demographic profiling, statistical analysis of the database to provide to potential and existing stakeholders, and to allow for more efficient operation of Stake.com’s business. https://stake.com/policies/privacy

***All information processed by us may be transferred, processed, and stored anywhere in the world, including but not limited to other countries, which may have data protection laws that are different from the laws where you live. https://stake.com/policies/privacy

I think that's a good idea for being subject to KYC. The whales usually and definitely have to comply with their terms because the sums of money they cash in and out are not a joke amount.
While for the low amounts and accounts that don't have much to gamble and just like betting sometimes with a few bucks, they don't have to be bothered by it.
Yet, there are still metrics and standards the different casinos has so the situation varies and reasons why one has to be subject to KYC.

For many people, the ideal would be to stop using KYC altogether. But that remains a utopia, of course, that cannot be achieved. I think it is also getting stricter, per license provider. How could you solve that? I think the last thing you want is to offer a gambling site through a jurisdiction where no license is used at all. That is something that customers can often be critical of nowadays. But many gamblers are already familiar with the KYC. At least, people who have been involved in the gambling world for a while will have already experienced this at 95% of the gambling sites. Especially when it comes to a traditional casino, and not just crypto.

I don't have bad ideas with gambling casino website required for KYC but need increase up for withdrawing limit user not pass their KYC, not all member are agree with KYC procedure but casino gambling restrict with account huge withdrawing fund and seems fair when limit withdrawing increase up and not impact with user leave casino gambling aware they have pass KYC. I don't know about how much with limit increasing for member without pass KYC because I just withdraw with small fund in gambling casino.

Better withdrawing under $3,000 without need KYC but if withdrawing above this amount the user should KYC earl if want increasing up their withdrawing fund from casino.

KYC is here for good. Even if we’ll always prefer non-KYC to avoid disclosing our personal information and to stay anonymous, it cannot be possible these days as most of the casinos are completely controlled by the government regardless if they are reputable or not. But if we are to give and submit KYC, then we should always go to the most trusted and reliable casino we know, and definitely not on the new casinos that have not yet proven their credibility.

The best solution that I'd expect from casinos is to be straightforward and honest from the start.

If they demand KYC from everyone they should put it in their TOS and make it clear - you make an account you will be asked for KYC.
If they demand KYC at random they should stop it and want it only from users who withdraw upwards of a certain (disclosed) amount.

They should also allow users to delete accounts and allow them to request that all their data including IP and email is deleted on request. No private data should be held and processed by them and KYC verification should be done by a third party that does it professionally and doesn't store data.

Maybe for now, Stake is still giving an exception and just require KYC whenever a huge amount is being withdrawn. But I’m not totally sure if it stays that way for long when most of the casinos are already requiring it from the start, and you can read it in their own rules that as long as KYC is required, user should submit to it. So let’s just be realistic about KYC, there is no solution to it, the government has set its rules and casinos are obliged to follow.

there are still some licensed casinos which do not require kyc from the start as they have certain limits before they require one. like if the user exceeds their accumulated deposits or withdrawals to $2k, that's when they will ask for kyc. but if you are just a small roller, they won't ask even if it is stated on their ToS that they require kyc. but with this kind of casino, a player should always be ready to submit his kyc docs, it means, better play on a reputable site even if you are a small roller.

If I remember right, Stake is set at 1,5 BTC lifetime withdrawal limit, once that is reached, the KYC is triggered. But don't take my word for it, it has been a while since my research.

I have always thought that we need in fact a generational change in order for bitcoin and altcoins to really become as widely adopted as we want, the oldest people I know do not trust banks and prefer to keep their savings in gold, then the next generations that came after them disregarded gold and instead put all their trust in banks and fiat money, and now we are suffering the consequences of that mistake, while younger generations also distrust banks but instead of going for gold they think bitcoin is the solution they have been looking for.

One more, they will always say that they must ensure that their users are not from certain restricted countries to make them safe. However, this may not be the main reason.

If comparing the pros and cons of doing KYC and not, it will never end, moreover if we are talking about the centralized casino. although they always say that they are high in privacy, when they are asking for KYC this means that they are not dealing with privacy. However, we don't know if they are really trusted enough or not in keeping safe our data. I really hate sending photos of my identity and my face to the KYC identification because this is too private. But sometimes, we don't have the choice to pick the best casino to have. Once more, they will not give us the solution that the term and condition may make the suers afraid to continue.

The KYC and use of currencies that value the user's privacy depends a lot on the region/country where the casino will be opened.

I am sure that casinos, if they could choose, would not implement KYC or restrict the use of certain cryptocurrencies, the ones who push for this regulation are the governments, because they know that casinos (especially online ones) are very used to commit money laundering, tax evasion and covering up other crimes.

Unfortunately, those who suffer from this are the users.

I believe that KYC should only be mandatory for users who want to withdraw a large amount, and even then it should be enforced with great caution.
As for users who just use the casino for fun, making contributions and spending everything on the game itself, there is no reason to require KYC... these users are just consuming a service.

While Freebitco.in woudn't ask you to provide KYC regardless how much you made deposit, withdrawal or winnings from this casino ;)

If you're want to gamble on reputable zero KYC casino, only Freebitco.in is the best choice. You can read on their TOS and you wouldn't find any rule about mandatory KYC. As long as you're not cheating or use other suspicious gambling bots, your account will be fine. Because if you did that, your account will get terminated.

Crypto casinos will not implement KYC because of regulations from regulators that make casinos follow these rules. While this may be tough for crypto casinos, they are trying to comply with the rules. And crypto casinos still give freedom to crypto users not to do KYC in full or more detail for users who bet using small money.

But it's different if you are a big player and often spend a lot of money gambling. Depending on how you use the money to gamble, crypto casinos may ask you to KYC.

Ser, DirectBet was one of the old casinos in Bitcoin, but they already closed during 2017 before you registered your account. You can read their announcement thread, https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=393147.0

They were the only on-chain casino that didn't require the user to open an account, didn't require to deposit their coins, and definitely didn't require KYC. It was truly a censorship-resistant casino built on top of the Bitcoin blockchain. It was probably inefficient, and slow when the network was congested, but it was working.

The big issue is that thousands of players are currently being coerced into handing over valuable personal data to anonymous individuals who take that data and move it to jurisdictions where it has no legal protection.

The data can be packaged into tranches and sold on to multiple buyers. Those buyers can then sell that data on again to other buyers. The victims have lost complete control of their own personal data and both they and their families have to deal with the negative consequences for the rest of their life, or longer.

Not to make this reply a bit off topic but I am not talking about directbet not being an on-chain casino. That question is for a casino that what if it is not an on-chain casino and in this case, what if directbet is not an on-chain casino?. I don't need to read their ann thread since I am asking all about the site more like a KYC of some sort. I know you will be confused as what KYC I really mean and it's not Know Your Customer but Know Your Casino. That's the reason why I ask a question and not about me saying that directbet is not an on-chain casino. What can you say or your opinion if directbet is not an on-chain casino?.
That's what I really want you to answer as shown in the quote.

That's why casinos should be transparent and always make it clear that they intend to do KYC. If users knew that their funds can be blocked if they don't submit documents, many wouldn't deposit anything because KYC is still a grey zone. It's that line many of us don't want to cross. Casinos know about it and they will obfuscate their rules and regulations to make people play and they'll start demanding KYC when a user wins some money. As long as people lose money, there's no KYC and everything is good.

IMO that's abuse and casinos that do it should be avoided.

It depends on the jurisdiction the casino operates in, but it is true what you say, it is very easy nowadays to lose control over one's personal information. This applies not only to casinos for mostly all kind of services that have anything to do with money or crypto.

That is why I would recommend people (who care about the management of their information) to check where the casino is registered, where it operates from and read the Terms of services or a summary of it.

It is very difficult to find the balance when it comes to KYC. It's normal for casino owners to persistently ask for KYC. Because in a possible lawsuit and court case (illegal money) they must have documents that they would like to defend themselves. Of course, from the perspective of both sides, both sides have their disadvantage. Requesting KYC, especially at crypto casinos will reduce gambling traffic and revenues will drop. The casino owner doesn't want that either. However, in this case, he takes all the risks. A casino that requests KYC has to present its licenses and necessary documents to the user to indicate its reliability. The casino requesting KYC must enter into a contract with the user and must contractually undertake that it will not give the KYC to third parties in any way. Finally if you are trading with CEX you have to do KYC.

Ser, you're taking what I posted and making another debate out of that. Because if DirectBet was not truly an on-chain casino, it would be like the casino in your, and my signature. But I was not talking about that, I was talking about the "Ideal Solution" for KYC this topic/OP is looking for, and I was merely making the suggestion that the "Ideal Solution" might be NO KYC which DirectBet provided.

KYC should never be required on withdrawal of winnings, as that money has come from the casino.

If a casino is concerned about money laundering they should only be allowed to ask for KYC prior to deposit.

The KYC system is being abused by the casinos, who will do anything they can to delay a withdrawal, in the hope you will start playing again.

That wasn't so hard to answer right?. You should have answered on point rather than educating me about directbet being an on-chain casino and one of the old casinos in bitcoin instead of pointing out the solution that you have mentioned like gambling in a xasino that is an on-chain casino and doesn't require KYC. In my previous post, I am stating about a situation if you are gambling in a casino that have license then you would be required to complete KYC before you can withdraw if you won decent or huge amount of money in their casino.

Ser, relax. Hahaha.

I wasn't educating you about DirectBet, I was only showing you what it was on-chain when you posted that "you couldn't read somewhere in their site that they're an on-chain casino". What site did you visit? The real DirectBet has been offline, and their topic in the forum has been locked.

I was also merely suggesting that having the "ideal KYC solution" could also be "fixed" through technical implementation, like DirectBet's on-chain solution.

no worries, I am relax and I am just pointing the fact about the discussion. No need to tell me to relax as I am relax and I am only sharing my thoughts and opinion to you. One more thing, you don't have to call me or address me as ser or sir. After all, we have the freedom of speech in this forum unlike the other platform where it is moderated and some words are not allowed. To be precise, I didn't visit directbet website or their ann thread as I am not interested in directbet at all.

It doesn't only matter where the money comes from, because AML laws also require to know where you are from and who exactly are you. There are some blacklisted names and countries they can't do business with. And since people use VPN they can't just trust on the IP where you are from.
Also your last sentence doesn't make any sense to me. If the withrawal is delayed, why would you play again until it's solved?

KYC will stay as a big problem won't it? I mean it is not clear why, but it is clear that we are going to keep having this for a long time and that upsets me for sure. I wish that it never even existed, that would have been a lot better. I am trying to make sure that I play in places that doesn't offer such a thing, and not have KYC at all, but unfortunately it is getting more and more common these days.

I get that people want to make sure that they are playing in legit places and most legit places have KYC but that doesn't mean that all places that doesn't ask KYC is shady, Stake doesn't ask it and they are as legit as it gets, and I like it that way.

The problems related to the KYC are probably not too bad. It's not something that has come up out of the blue in recent months. It has been current for years and perhaps longer than that. At every regular gambling site you will be asked to identify yourself via the KYC procedure. If we are talking about a gambling site that only accepts crypto, it will of course be a different story. A licensee can demand all kinds of things, but how are they going to check all of that? That is tedious and complex work, I think that the authorities are busy with completely different things than checking such matters.

In my opinion, I do believe KYC has been rather efficient in delivering on its service to these sites that patronize them. Other than KYC, unless one is thinking full biometrics capturing, I don't see more than a few adjustments to what KYC stands to offer right now, explored. Perhaps other KYC competitors may have simplified processes involved, the best of them is supposed to be articulate, precise and have a simple enough to understand interface which users should not waste much time to update their details with. This KYC has delivered on, and other competitors would have to beat this stat.

When we talk about KYC it has to be identified on which approach we are addressing this, why should an organization or a gambling website needs the KYC informations if not to track the users, i believe that every information about a gambler will always be used against him in the future and also KYC is not the solution to avoiding abuses like scams and hacking from fraudulent people over a casino, kyc should be a thing of choice that a gambler can choose to go by or avoid the process entirely.

Text to image generation software using deep machine learning,
can already generate KYC images and ID documentation that can pass KYC acceptance levels.

The issue for KYC is being able to determine if there is a real person at the other side of the process.

This is not really a solution, to begin with this is most likely illegal, then you are also taking a massive risk as the casino could ask for more documentation and you will have no way to produce it as all of it was false, and finally if at some point this became popular among some gamblers then casinos will begin to ask for videos of the gamblers holding their documents or even ask to make a video call with you, defeating the whole purpose of doing this.

That's actually a crime especially if there is someone to the generated ID made. It's identity theft and once caught, you might get some jail time. Also, other than being in jail, you will have no way of obtaining your funds as those will be confiscated and be locked out from you.
And, yes, if this becomes a thing, more and more platforms would lean more on having a better and stricter KYC process which would involve more documentation and possibly your appearance during KYC process.

Where there is no law then there is no law broken and therefore no crime.

I thought you said that, "you couldn't read somewhere in their site that they're an on-chain casino", https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=5425027.msg61401864#msg61401864

I probably misunderstood?

As learners of Bitcoin as a protocol and as users of cryptocurrencies, plebs like you and me who have posted our own opinions in the topic should research and learn more about DirectBet, and how it's a good model for an ideal KYC solution. It could also be one of the best illustrations in how to utilize the Bitcoin blockchain, and how to build services that have an actual on-chain usage that's censorship-resistant and non-custodial.

That's not quite right because if there are no laws, humans can act arbitrarily, and there is a disorder in all fields. With laws, the government can regulate people, but unfortunately, some people still try to break them or some people work in government who abuse those rules.

Ideal or not, KYC will depend on how we feel because it's not ideal for us if we don't want to do it. The terms of KYC seem to be similar from one casino to another. And we choose where we will do the KYC.

I didn't know about this, do you have any examples which I could take a look at?

I'm aware that AI content is entering it's renaissance period, I'm dodging those AI writers as crazy this year, but to generate KYC imagery is a new thing that I didn't know exists :D 

A preferable way of KYC for me would be a picture of me, holding a piece of paper with current date, site address and a visible account information, showing that this is me who has logged in into my platforms account. I am not fond of sharing any of my documents. In fact, with all modern technologies, black market, VPNs, it is not hard to create fake ID or imitate location to bypass existence to unsupported country. That is why all that "send frond and back of ID, passport, drivers license, and a picture of you holding it" does not solve KYC problem.

There are no off the shelf services made for this specific purpose, at least none that I'm aware of, also I suspect that any currently available off the shelf text to AI service would have anti-counterfeit features in-built.

However given a combination of:
1: sufficient motivation
2: an imagination and an IQ slightly above the average intellect of  recent respondents to this thread
3: access to the correct training data such as the imagery stored in any kyc data base of any existing casino
4: the ethical values of the average casino owner

then it is my opinion that the quality of the image reproduction possible at current levels is sufficiently high enough to produce persuasive results. The quality of that imagery is improving at an exponential rate. I believe also that the Equivalent levels of high quality real-time video is not far off if not already within the realms of possibility.

I have already stated that KYC data is of high commercial value to a casino like stake.com. They are exerting high pressure on players to hand over that data at minimum cost before any legislation prevents them from doing this. Selling access to a KYC database for the purpose of building a text to image training model for deep fake ID image generation, is just one example of how players can be exploited beyond the traditional levels of exploitation you'd expect from the average online casino.

I was laughing on this a bit too much :D

I loved the overview, and you're completely right, it would be doable.

KYC will be determined directly from the platform demands, because i think that each of the platform have their on way of making or having theirs method of verification, i know that in KYC verification what's necessary there is the image of the follow, so with such way i understand that KYC is something i believe that during the verification it demands one and two ways, so i believe that some people think that the demand of one particular platform concerning KYC verification is same thing.

KYC is a never-ending debate, but we all know what we want in this space, no KYC is a freedom you can't buy from anyone, it is an indispensable element for users regardless of the casino's benefits. Money laundering in casinos can be reduced by limiting the number of withdrawals unless the casino does so and uses the players as the victims.

Just a few hours ago, Cointracker users emails were leaked due to some carelessness on the team's part, and the users are angry and want to sue the company for allowing their data to be exposed, the same scenario can happen to Casino if it has not already happened, nobody can properly save your documents the way you do, and the moment they are uploaded to the internet, that is the end of your privacy.

No law? Falsification of documents and Identity theft are both serious crimes and people who do this are liable for some jail time once caught. Other than doing illegal activities, you may make the KYC thing worst, especially when a gambling platform requested additional information regarding your documents as it is just made up. You may also, not receive or recover your funds if you won't be able to provide the same information if the casino asked for further verification.

I can't really gamble at casinos that exempt me from KYC. Some of the casinos don't ask for personal documents at first, but when you win something that looks like a big, they may demand that you complete the KYC. The lowest data is email, then cellphone number, and maybe they will ask for other data such as bills or whatever they think is necessary so that withdrawals can be made. Regulatory reasons may make sense, but it sure hurts the customer in the end when this data is leaked and misused.

KYC should not be required for any gambler, but since some people may use gambling sites for money laundering or other unlawful things, rules were definitely made. All problems start with the user himself, and therefore prevention is thought of regardless of being detrimental or beneficial to one side or both parties.

what is feared is that cases of money laundering will indeed occur, because online casinos will be very vulnerable to being misused as a place to store crime proceeds and eliminate traces by laundering money in casino games.
KYC regulations are needed to find out who the customer is who is depositing and withdrawing a lot of money in several transactions. Maybe not all of them require KYC, only in case of large withdrawals for security reasons. But will this be a good solution? in some online casinos KYC is required, and we as users are also given the choice whether to do KYC or not, we also have to really have the best and most trusted online casino. do not let the data that we input be misused. KYC is good for preventing money laundering and other types of crime, but KYC will also backfire if not in the right place.

I don’t believe that centralized casinos have high privacy because if they do, they don’t have to disclose our private information into the government that regulated them. But it’s not the case since centralized casinos have to follow the terms and conditions given by the government, otherwise they will subject for investigation. So my point is, let’s just accept the reality that if you gamble in reputable centralized casinos, be ready to take the risk since KYC is soon to become compulsory. And with that, privacy is no longer given to us as these casinos have taken our own privacy.

I agree with you. I, too, am of the opinion that KYC cannot give any guarantee that the account really belongs to the person in whose name it is registered. I've heard more than once that abusers have hundreds of accounts on various sites.

There are more and more stories on the internet lately about someone being played with dip-fake technology. I think that even a video conference will not help to identify the person on the other end of the line, if it is very necessary.

Sites can use the KYC procedure as they wish. There are no standard rules for this. Unfortunately, it is also often used to delay payouts, as we have seen in the past. And then when documents are requested, sites are happy to take weeks to complete the verification. There are also scams that ask for new additional documents. The KYC has always been there in online gambling. It has become more and more a requirement, but many gamblers will have few problems with it. In a gambling shop you also have to show your passport if you are going to gamble there.

haha thanks, I'm trying to figure out who is running AI text generators on their accounts.

Fortunately I will say that a casino verification is something that will determine or attest that this person is credible and also part of the platform by 4 ft documentation to the platform but some people do not like to accept some verification of kyc in a platform because I find it very difficult to verify why it is something that protect you from having a miss found in your account

KYC is good most time to verify the identities of users and need to be less for requirements. Some casinos asking for KYC do have another purposes for this which is why many gamblers do not like to use a KYC casinos. I can see that some of the verification is to ensure the users identities so that there will be less complains from users a out account problem or difficulties.

Kyc is very important except that it's people that does not know the essence of kyc because if you work online then you will know that a platform giving you an order for kyc verification means that they want to put it your your account and also your phones created so that when anything happen to eat on an entire that is to show that you are one of them because all your documents have been very fine but some people does not understand it that way

This is quite smart and would be possible. It would be interesting to see how the casinos would battle an influx of fake documents... This would most likely create another completely opposite industry (e.g. software to detect fake documents).

However why this 1xbit spammers are saying KYC casino is good? what I know 1xbit is a casino that doesn't require KYC, so does this mean 1xbit is a bad casino? :D

There's no tools that has a perfect system to distinguish between fake documents and legit documents, those tools only give a percentage of possible the documents got edited. False positive could happen, it would make a genuine gambler got accused, this is why requiring KYC is pointless.

Most of the casinos nowadays really require a KYC because they are being regulated by the government. In this case, you'll know that they are already in centralized manner. Most casinos are like this because they have to adapt from the changes, otherwise, their operations might put into halt if they won't follow the authorities. Although yes, there are still casinos which do not require such. However, like what you said, the games are limited and they are only a few of them left as well.

There are also casinos who claim to having no KYC but on the latter part when you are going to withdraw your funds and prizes, they'll hold your account because you have to undergo the verification process. In this instance, you should be careful on where to play and where to sign up because you might be surprised at the end of the day.

Maybe falsification of documents to verify gambling accounts can happen. Still, it won't happen forever because the casino will look for ways to prevent it. Maybe later, there will be face identification of each gambler so that the casino will know that the account owner is really valid. We have seen that some exchanges are already doing face verification and this may also be implemented in casinos that want to have real members with the documents they have.

If a gambler decided on what he wants, define his search and go after it, there's nothing bad about that, KYC is nit a thing of force to do, it has to be an optional decision to take and the extent to how you can research and trust the findings from your search is what should be considered, but we need to emphasize that casinos need not to frame things up about their KYC requirements before gamblers to engage them and later regret their decision in choosing them, which means there must be transparency in whatsoever thing we do.

I've been seeing quite a lot of users who have gambled at well-known casinos lately, complaining for various reasons, it's because of the ineffective KYC verification system, so that it is easy for users who do not want to accept their defeat when betting at online casinos to carry out the element of risk of accusations, fraud and crime.

In my opinion to avoid all the risks of crime against online casinos from users who blame various kinds of bonuses, multi-accounts and so on, in the system minimizing kyc a good and smart foundation to reduce the activity of several loopholes and manipulations such as fraud crimes in general.

On the one hand, a KYC strategy based on digital online casinos will drive transformation and will create multiple identity experiences for the casino as a whole, for example: KYC electronically the casino can get to know customers or users in detail, if a crime occurs as I said above at a later date.

This thing is very easy but it also all depends on how we the users see this things.
Most times we should not blame this casinos because this things aren't in their control and they also have regulations they have to stick to and abide by.
Just as this gambling regulatory bodies are the hope of the common gambler, we also have to know that there are law that wouldn't favour us the users.
One thing is sure that if this casinos were to work on their on principles and policies, they would want to dance to every tune of the common player but most times they have to follow the policies of the regulatory bodies.

I'm going to quote both of you for shitposting and spamming the thread with your never-ending 1xbit signature. Did 1xbit tell you to tell people that an Identify account would aid in the identification of people's funds? That is deceptive, and please refrain from disseminating false information. What happened to the emails and mobile numbers they all requested? I believe the same 1xbit has that option, as well as an ID number for each player/user.

KYC is a choice, and I will continue to refuse it. Only if you know how the mini war that has been going on with Binance and some users on Twitter space these few days, you would not want anyone to know your identity because they will come after you both online and offline, you must not trust anyone with your documents.

We have to allow all regulation from casino gambling trough required with KYC or not, I don't think have serious problem when submitting KYC in casino account because we have upload document ID on exchange market although have been collapse like FTX. Securing or not our document used in casino gambling later actually depend with how reputation from one casino, I think we know about experience and trusted casino allowed for KYC.

Don't blame with any one still not agree with KYC in casino gambling, you can get many casino not requiring with KYC but you have accepted term term of service limited withdrawing and depositing your fund.

Well, the truth is that up to now Betfury has not had any problem with it, however, it must be pointed out that when there are things like casinos, or exchanges that are decentralized, there will always be problems when things do not go well, the player cannot be wrong because to have Attention must also be difficult to obtain, however, a casino that does not ask for KYC or a pkatafrma that does not ask for KYC is freebitco.in and everything has turned out wonderfully, if they can I think it is a reason for others to do it too something to soften this requirement, perhaps they are not so radical with that part of rigorously demanding KYC but rather they ask for it in a very simple way without so many required papers or documentation.

Reputation will always be the key. I don't mind sending my information to a well-known gambling platform. It's just the same as how I trust a reputable exchange with my details to enable maximizing the withdrawal limit benefits. Because that's just how it is, when they grow bigger as a company they tend to be a target by the government using the money laundering act.
What I don't really like about KYC's is the annual updates, I think they should stretch this up to 2-3 years before they re-check the players if they are changes with their profiles.

Yes it is true and I agree with you that we are willing to give our information to a place where our personal information will be kept safe.  So in this case it will depend on the reputation of the exchanger or any gambling site or any site.  If I know a site to be very trustworthy and think that they will never commit illegal acts or fraud, I am definitely willing to give my personal documents there.  Because I have full faith in them.  But I will not give kyc document for any site which I don't know well and its reputation is not high.

Some people still do falsification of documents because some casinos' security isn't tight yet regarding this matter. This is the reason why some underage people are able to make an account despite the age limit stated on the TOS of the casino. Although most likely in the future this will also be resolved since the technology is now advancing continuously. Precautionary measure such as KYC can limit the illegal activities that could be done inside the casinos. It also serves as a good way to verify the identity of the person making an account, but as of now there are loopholes such as the aforementioned that needs to be addressed.

Some exchangers are indeed doing face recognitions before you can successfully make an account. This is to verify that you are really the holder of the identification card and it is not just stolen or bought from someone. This might be implemented in casinos too if they will prioritize security and exclusivity of their site to those who can only pass the requirements needed to open an account.

I'm happy to see an intelligent response. Reading through the forum in the last days, l'm left with the image of the parasite that poisons the host from which it feeds by shitting in its own food supply, and a host who's health is in rapid decline.

Now that you mentioned that this might be why some underage people could create accounts and verify them, this could allow them to assume adult identities freely. But let's hope I'm wrong and that no underage person creates an account using an adult identity. If this did happen, the casino would tighten up the rules and it would be possible for the casino to ask them to do an online scan of the account holder to make sure they are the same person.

Actually, KYC for casinos is currently also needed to anticipate illegal activities where casinos certainly don't want to be associated with that activity. And this makes casinos pay attention to KYC issues, even though not all casinos will implement KYC for all of their members and only for some members.

How many of you, that posted in this topic, were asked to pass KYC in a casino? How many of you were asked to pass KYC after winning hell out of money? I cant say that I gamble online every day, have wagered billions and immediately register at every new casino, but I have never been asked to pass KYC in casinos. The only kind of weird stuff I was asked to do by casinos is to add 2FA while withdrawing. Strange that they did not ask to add 2FA when depositing :D

I wont say new if I say that ideal KYC is no KYC at all, but probably giving less personal data will be an ideal KYC. Because also KYC can be faked. Which makes passing it a joke. Making a photo or video of login process with KYC will be more than enough to prove that accounts belongs to you.

It's a bit strange Sir, and I think it's safer if 2FA is activated because only you will know the code and no one else will and it can't be cheated either. The casino you mention is good if that's the case.


That's right here Sir because it's true that the KYC can be cheated, especially if there is no video call or if there is, the person talking may have been oriented by the gambler and there was an agreement between the KYC owner.

Even a video call can’t avoid KYC being cheated since they don’t get initial information of the customer before they ask KYC. The casino has no proof for the real owner so anyone can do the KYC with or without video call involved. Some casino ask personal information of players during registration but most of the big casino doesn’t require this since most player doesn’t preferred it due to there safety of privacy.

So even with KYC a cheater can still cheat the casino by paying someone to KYC for his account.

Well what do we expect from them? They are from the 1xbit team. They are different from the legit users in the forum so they may like things that we didn't like. Casinos that don't require a KYC doesn't automatically mean that they are a good casino. 1xbit can require or won't require a KYC but it won't change the fact that they are still a shady casino.

It will be hard to detect a fake document, that is why each KYC verification requires the users to scan their face in real time and they will follow a certain instruction. That way the system knows that they are dealing with a real person and that person is the same to the person that they see in the submitted ID.

Consider the casino that;

- makes a choice to operate in a jurisdiction that does not require them to implement kyc procedures through regulation.

- chooses a jurisdiction that offers no legal protection to the player.

- selectively imposes a "kyc" like policy on the player, but only does so in instances in which it is to it's own financial advantage.

-publicly states through multiple marketing channels that it never witholds funds from players.

-witholds players funds as a means of coercion in order to obtain data of high commercial value which they sell to any interested parties who are prepared to pay the price.

- quotes "regulatory requirements" when asked to justify their behaviour, in full knowledge that they operate outside  of any legal framework.

- actively encourages players directly and indirectly to create multiple accounts, offering level up bonuses and other incentives on those alts, then banning those accounts before they have to payout those bonuses.

-uses the excuse of multi accounting, which they encouraged, to deny paying out to players.

Then ask yourself what kind of person would promote such a casino. I suggest you do your homework before you promote stake.com here in this forum.

It would not be the first time I have seen some of them saying some non-sense around here in the forum for the sake of trolling, I guess.
Also, I assume that casinos and exchanges ask for real time verification of one's face  because a simple picture or scan of one's document would not reveal security measures printed on the document, like ultraviolet ink or holograms. So at least with face verification they can be somewhat sure it is not an identity theft case.

Dude, KYC is simply a way for the godamned government put their hands on whats not theirs. Basically, there are no solutions. Going through the KyC  is a cumbersome process not only for players but also for casinos. IMO, casinos should be tring to find ways of helping customers avoiding the KYC but unfortunately, casinos are stuck with compliance and KYC is a demand to which if they not follow, their business will suffer the consequences

You can technically conclude that both are safe. Online you have advanced software, but I don't think he can mess with it. Gamblers have indicated that they wager higher amounts much faster online. You will not see the money, but only a number. That is very different from sitting at a roulette table. At an online casino you have many more games, it just depends on what you like. That is alldetermining whether you play in a casino or live casino.

Maybe before making a video call, the casino might do an online face verification to check if the face and photo on the ID are the same so they can process the verification.

Most crypto casinos do not ask for personal information and only ask for email addresses and passwords. But the casino will apply KYC for gamblers, especially those who often get big wins or deposit and withdraw large amounts of money or if the casino notices any suspicious activity from the gambler. A cheater can trick the casino but the casino will not sit idly by and see this happen. Casinos will definitely set up even stricter KYC, even if it's a crypto casino.

   -  You are right in what you mentioned, boss, an abusive gambler will do anything just to get what he wants. Giving KYC is easy to cheat, but is there another way to avoid cheating at a casino, right?

But most the gamblers don't want KYC, it's just that the rules on a casino platform are not adjusted correctly so that their players can be very comfortable in their gambling.

KYC does not verify a players identity, it simply verifies that the specified documentation has been submitted.

KYC and AML regulations and procedures do not stop money laundering. Those involved in that activity find
their way around regulations because they are highly incentivized to do so.

Pre-verified accounts are being bought and sold online by enterprising individuals who are addressing a
demand in an emerging market.

The inconvenience and the cost of KYC procedures is therefore borne by the majority of ordinary users who have no intention
of breaking any laws, they simply do not wish to risk having their personal identity documents stolen when a casino's database is inevitably hacked.

There are a few sites where you have to identify yourself with the KYC procedure when you register your own. Actually, that is also the most honest. That way you can never get conflicts or problems with bets placed. How many times have we seen gamblers make a deposit, place a lot of bets and then the gambling site steps in to say that the KYC has not been completed or that there is fraud or something like that? It's a shame it's like this, but it's the reality. By performing the KYC immediately upon registration, you prevent a lot of problems.

I am not really against KYC, as it in a sense helps protect me from attacks and makes sure that nobody gets on to my precious holdings but only me. But I understand the logic behind the disapproval of implementing KYC by some users here. After all, cryptocurrency was made to offer freedom by means of decentralization and anonymity. The fact that they are implementing KYC just defeats the purpose all in all. Although for me, if you really just don't want to do KYC, which most reputable sites already implement, you must be willing to run the risk of less security given that there are no contingencies for when push comes to shove and you lose all your holdings to some hacker from who-knows-where.

We know the pro's and benefits when we do talk about KYC which you could really be having the chance on claiming or something talks about being protected but we know the essence on dealing up with crypto because

even if you do have that kind of identification or could sent out those proofs but due to irreversible characteristic of crypto then there's no way that you could assure that everything would turn out to be fine.
One of the reason on why this crypto gambling space had become that relevant and become that known and have that demand due into that anonymity and kyc does really totally oppose that
idea which is something that do really give out that kind of bad impression on the time that kyc procedure is becoming stricter.

You should check the casino site you are using and old users will explain KYC requests, but almost all casinos recently will ask users KYC after account registration or after deposits and withdrawals, so KYC is inevitable if betting on every casino and but we should be aware of the use of KYC to enhance account protection and prevent crime from money laundering.

At the end it is a matter of what you prefer? Do you want privacy or security? However the big problem those that would prefer some extra privacy have is that we do not have that option anymore, we do not really have a choice, everywhere you go and almost every service that you use asks for all kind of data that in many cases is not needed in order to receive the service you want, so it seems normal to me that those that are looking for privacy are not really happy with how this market is evolving, when one of its most basic premises was that their privacy will be improved.

More and more, we can't avoid KYC because this seems to be an obligation, and we also have to be prepared if one day a casino asks us to do KYC. And even though, for now, the casinos where we gamble don't require KYC, there is a possibility that it will happen, especially when regulators pressure the casinos to apply it to all of their members. But we can still hope that we will not be among the people asked to do KYC because we are just little gamblers trying to play gambling for fun.

Well there are many policies of crypto casinos that should not exist, if we are in a casino that is really crypto, there should not be any type of limitation regarding your withdrawal, not even $2k or something, because the idea of using crypto is for skip all the rules imposed by banks, governments and sometimes it does not make much sense for a casino to have requirements similar to those of a bank, for that, it is better to use Fiat money casinos where it is known that a transfer can be made banking and they have all the data and there is total control over some user, and I don't think there is that much of a problem, but crypto casinos are now getting complicated from the start, and that makes many players leave.

I think kyc system sort of kills the purpose of using cryptocurrencies. It feels lot more safe/independent to move my wealth through crypto because of obvious reasons. Many people prefer crypto to take a breath out of government controlled financial world.
When I think about casino side, they should always establish it in a relaxed law country. Giving exceptions to users that can move through some regulations may also help.

I think it is a bit about the fact that crypto and casinos or crypto and exchanges are different logics to begin with when you use them. The reality is that crypto itself, like bitcoin for example, is decentralized and that means there is no central figure that controls it, we are all in control and that means we could make it work without telling anyone who we are, not even a nickname if we do not want to.

However, if we are talking about an exchange or a casino that is run by a centralized organization, there is an owner at the top, and when you use something centralized like that then you are giving all the rights to your information away, and they can ask you for anything, it could be crypto or fiat or anything else.

If you really don't want to undergo KYC, then just find another option that doesn't require one. Unfortunately though, most exchangers and casinos now require to undergo verification process before you can make an account. If you just want to have a secure place to put your crypto, one of the best option is to place it in hardware wallet or cold wallet which don't require information gathering.

However, if you are going to exchange your crypto in fiat money, you're most likely to uae an exchanger which in this current time is requiring KYC before you can process a transaction. I think it's just a matter of choosing your hard.

It seems so, but we can't do anything about it and hope there will still be casinos that won't implement KYC so strictly that we, crypto gamblers, won't think too much about it. People who know crypto is the right choice to escape the government-controlled financial world will continue to try to save their money in crypto so they don't have to think about regulations that can burden crypto users. The KYC system in online crypto casinos has now developed because more and more people who know crypto make the government want to know people who use crypto through implementing KYC.

This is just a matter of understanding on both the part of the user and the casino.
Most times, we users tend to mount so much unnecessary pressure on this casinos even after knowing that they are subjected to some regulatory bodies and don't act on their own wills.
I've heard stories of users shy away from KYC because I see no reason why one should shy away from KYC if you know that your activities are genuine and you no have no fear of criminality then I would advice that you help this casino so their KYC

For me it's better to have KYC if we deposit a big amount because when we are going to withdraw our winning amount we have the assurance that our money will transacted smoothly and fast. But also we need to choose a good and legitimate casino first before we give our personal information as we all know that once you already gave your personal information you will not be anonymous anymore.

The best and lasting solution is for a gambler who doesn't mind using a kyc casino to continue using them and never complained about any requests for kyc since he had known that already while the other option is for a gambler to avoid a kyc casino if he understands that could be a loads of hectic stress on him whenever they make demands for it, there are many casinos that does not support kyc which gamblers can use, the mistake we make is in thinking a casino will adjust it policy to suit your own desires by complying to your demand which they can never do, you have to adhere to theirs in full compliance, so don't expect they will change because of your own demands.

You must look for a good and trusted site to deposit a large amount and you must not deposit a large amount on a scam site or a new site or a site with a low reputation.  So when you go to invest in any reputable and trusted site, kyc is not an issue and doing kyc here will not be any problem and your documents will be  protect there. So KYC must be done to deposit a large amount

Perhaps gamblers want to go through a KYC procedure so that they have more certainty. In general, these gambling sites are also all so free to publish their company details. I think that as a gambler you are more likely to play there than on a gambling site where there is no company data at all. A fair solution for KYC would still be to perform a KYC at the time a player is about to register, or at least before they can make a deposit. This also has the advantage that a gambling site cannot come up with excuses to hold certain payouts unnecessarily.

New sites couldnt really be having that kind of reputation on which they would really be that trusted on accepting huge deposits which i cant really blame out for those people who are really that hesitant on doing so.
We should bare up into your minds that those popular ones that we do have today are once newbie sites too, it is really just they do really be able to get that reputation and recognition on a certain period of time.
KYC solution? This is something that we should really be accepting starting now on which it is really that hard to avoid up these things considering that platforms do really
gets centralized and would be needing to go or abide with government laws and regulations.

Well this is something that cannot be avoided, I think the same as you, but there must be better things that come out in the future, for me one of the best platforms that do not ask for KYC is freebitco.in, and the truth is that I have played for a long time time, but I never worried about knowing if they asked for KYC, until not long ago I found out that they didn't ask for it, because I imagined that when people were going to withdraw large amounts from the platform they asked for it, so I think that here is what can be done It is that there are many options like this, and those who really like their preferred casino have to stick to their KYC criteria.

That's why we deposit a small amount of money to a new site in order to test their services cause if they have a good services then we recommend it to our friends and leave a good and positive feedback. Yes you are right that mate once a highly recommended and trusted enough casino run nowadays they start as a newbie but with their good in handling a customer they achieve what they have right now .

kyc verification is a sensitive thing. So gambling with small amount without doing kyc verification on new sites first, it is better to do kyc after getting to know the site well. Because doing kyc on a trusted site is not a big problem.  But doing kyc on a new site leaves the possibility of personal document theft .

For me, the best balance here should be that all users should be allowed to gamble without KYC and if anyone observed to carry out any suspicious activity, then such person should be mandated to either do KYC or leave the casino for good. And secondly, users should be allowed to deposit, withdraw and gamble freely without KYC, but if such individual happens to win an amount above $10k, then he/she should be asked to do KYC before withdrawing, to ensure such fund goes to the hand of the rightful owner.

That actually was being implemented with a handful of trusted crypto casinos before, when regulations was not strictly enforced yet.
I've heard of it before, that there is a certain limit wherein you can play, withdraw, and deposit without KYC compliance.
But, when you cross beyond that limit, that's the only time the casino would ask you to disclose your information, to protect you from lossing such huge amount of money stored in their platform.

I don't know where you guys are playing or betting but this "KYC later" policy is still being implemented by a lot of crypto casinos today. The withdrawal limits just varies per platform. I think it's already balance that way.

Casinos in general wants every user to enjoy playing without much regulatory hassle but they are sometimes forced to implement KYC and other identification measures. Let's admit that some users try to bypass or violate casino terms and would complain a lot when caught.

True. If casinos fail from KYC compliance, then they will also be in danger and might lose their license due to non-compliance. So both casinos and players are obligated to do so when it comes to KYC verification as it’s an order coming from the gambling regulatory boards. Just as reputable casinos are seriously asking us for our personal information details, so they can give us a fair play and a safeguarded environment, then we also have to do in return by trusting them that they will not be disclosing and become responsible on keeping our personal information safe and secured.

Any site that you provide KYC, do not believe that the site can not sell customers KYC information, but in gambling, most gambling sites are demanding for KYC now, but giving it out to them only means you trust them but no one can be trusted when you are talking about KYC, we have seen many companies that people trusted that later give their customers KYC to another company. KYC and also be breached by hackers.

We should not also expect excellent service from a gambling site because their customers comply with KYC policies, it does not mean. Only the sites that their customers are not having genuine complaints should be the most trusted.

Many people afraid about their document selling trough acquired when registering on some gambling casino, I don't think have easy procedure about KYC or document ID from casino gambling will sell in dark market, they have securing and regulation before adapting KYC procedure.

Don't be serious with KYC procedure adopted at several casino gambling because several casino is free for joining without have submit KYC, but have disadvantage with limited withdrawing without submit KYC and preparing later if account get trouble have to use KYC. Have been habit with uploading document, all exchange cryptocurrency market make necessary with uploading document ID and take selfie.

Would really be that subjective and we arent that dumb not to notice out those new platforms been strictly enforcing verification which is something off on todays standards. Most of legit platforms
do only ask out for some verification if you have make out huge deposits which it turns out to be that a standard but if a new platform do ask out on the time that you do make out some
registration then it would really be a huge turn off and we know  that kyc is highly been frowned upon on this forum or place on which it is totally opposing
on what we do like or simply talking about anonymity and decentralization.

The black market is real maybe you never access the site that sells ID documents to thousands of data, you have to take care of ID document data not to give free on all gambling and exchange sites, we can't get around the KYC request rule but at least we have checked the reputation and rating top platform that has been recommended by forum members

That is why it is good to avoid fake or scam gambling sites, after they will try to scam many users, some users can be scammed while their identity documents can be sold in the black market. A good gambling site will try to protect their customers identity documents but what if it is hacked? Also that you should not trust any company if you do not want to feel disappointed while your data has been leaked.

What I have noticed is that deposit is easy and it requires no KYC, but if you win and want to withdraw, or you want to withdraw from the gambling site, that is when you will know that they will request for KYC before you will be able to withdraw minimum withdraw amount.

Just in case you don't know, the first time we go through the process of KYC on a site, we already exposed our identity.

Don't believe too much that these companies will sell our identity to the black market.

But I'm not 100% ignoring the beliefs of others about that. So for that, then just stick with a reputable site in case of submitting KYC.

Unfortunately, things are changing and it's not just at online casinos, but also at exchanges and any other service that deals with cryptocurrencies.

It has been a long time (two years or more) that people could find cryptocurrencies an easy way to purchase services and products completely anonymously, today governments are very attentive to everything involving cryptocurrencies, for two reasons:

1. Bitcoin has become a real threat to many state currencies, as certain (not rare) people have discovered that it is not very complicated to live on crypto income alone.

2. Hits, hits and more hits. In the past we had a lot of cases of hacks involving millions of Bitcoins, today the values have decreased, but their correlation in Fiat has increased a lot, especially when it involves large and well-known companies in the crypto environment.

Finally, I believe that this will get worse and worse, and unfortunately everything you do will be through identification and a lot of bureaucracy.

Freebitco.in is a legend that still exists today and does not ask its users to do KYC. But I don't know if the government also wants to collect more taxes on them, the site will ask its users to do KYC. But for an ideal KYC solution, maybe casinos don't need to do very strict and complete KYC. It's only enough to ask for user identity without asking for proof of income, bank proof, or other personal data so it doesn't burden most gamblers to verify their accounts. . If casinos can do this, I think many gamblers, both small and big, will do it, especially if they play gambling in a trusted casino.

Ideal KYC is no KYC. The best KYC is a dead one.

There are already zero KYC casinos which you can trust. One of them is freebitco.in. You don't have to bow your head and hand over your passport scans every time they ask from you. Fuck that. Binance did this to me when I got a few hundred bucks inside and I was mad af. That's why I am not creating an account on any pro-KYC services anymore.

No casino site is trustworthy without KYC.  Because, that will not demand KYC from you for any big thing.  That site can definitely ask you for kyc anytime or anywhere. If it happens that you are gambling with a big amount on the casino site without kyc and  they ask you for kyc at a time when you are not ready to give KYC.  What will happen to your account and funds then?

I had to quote your entire topic because I do understand whatost of this casinos grow through just to please their customers who most times seem to be really inconsiderate and that isn't always fair.
Most times we the users prefer to beied to rather than accepting tye truth and trying to cop with it, we rather prefer to take short cuts that looks so promising but ends up to failure or destruction.
The moment I see a casino being licensed and duely registered, I always understand that they're automatically under a whole lot of rules and regulations themselves while still trying to please we the users.
Most times I always have to blame the users as people responsible for making this gs difficult for ourselves giving room for criminality in the gambling industry

DEX everything and go no KYC
I agree that KYC is a rule that starts dead and will incentivize bad behavior by users
Like buying documents from others or paying someone else to KYC for you

There are really casinos that do not require KYC. You just have to find the ones that hold credibility and reputation so that you will get your money's worth and you won't undergo hassle and stress when you encounter troubles. Good for you that you already found one since you are not fond of verification processes.

When it comes to making an account, it's really your responsibility to check in their TOS if they require KYC before verifying your account. Binance is not a casio, it is an exchanger, and most exchangers nowadays have mandatory KYC, so you have to abide by their policies if you really want to make an account. If you don't really want that kind of process, just stick to non-KYC platforms. I think there's a thread about that topic here in forum.

In the eyes of others to prevent the creation of many accounts in a gambling casino, KYC is the solution they immediately think of regarding this matter. There is truth in what they say about KYC,

But from another angle, KYC is also used as an excuse by abusive casinos for other gamblers who play correctly and follow the rules, even though there is a lot of evidence that complains that there are other casinos that are making a way to not release the big winnings of a gambler who played on their platform.

I agreed with your opinion about requiring with KYC for all casino gambling participant, due risk with document using I don't think problem faced by casino gambling platform user due they don't afraid when making huge deposit amount. I think with KYC require will help many gambler from money laundering and casino adopted several countries regulation.

There are never has any mistake and problem about account suddenly suspend due huge withdrawing fund and need recovery by submitting KYC, when first time after registering then upload document ID make us easy and have guarantee with account doesn't need KYC if some time having problem with abnormal activities until withdrawing huge fund.

not only to gamble with large amounts but the big wins that we get and we want to withdraw these funds usually gambling will also ask us for KYC.
We can't avoid it all, if we still want to continue gambling with large amounts and big wins we have to keep doing KYC and for me it's not like we have to submit to the gambling platform but we only comply with the terms and conditions that have been set on the gambling platform.