Bitcoin Forum

When i first heard about bitcoin, one of the selling points then was the pseudo anonymity. But as of recently, it is hard to purchase any crypto without encountering a form of KYC.

I’m just curious of everyone’s thought on this.

Yes, yes it is. But right now that bitcoin is still not widely adopted by the majority of people, then unfortunately we need these easy to use onramps(though yes we have  no-KYC p2p exchanges).

In the end, people will use whatever is easier for them. The typical person doesn’t care about privacy in the first place.

You can still trade BTC with anonymity, it all depends on what you prefer. There are so many exchanges around and most of them are centralized that require KYC. If you are ready to compromise on your privacy then you can join these centralized exchanges. But yes I do agree that most common source of BTC trading is through these exchanges.

It is still up to the user to either pay serious attention to their privacy and not use exchanges that require KYC, and of course there are ways to purchase Bitcoin without it, thus in my opinion, it's actually not a problem with the network, but with the particular user, as we all know the user is in control and is their own bank, so they have their privacy in their hands, if they want to give it up by using KYC exchanges, then it's on them. Though you can definitely stay safe when you use centralized exchanges, what you basically need to do is just follow the rule of thumb of not storing your funds in there for a long period of time.

Having said that, I know it's pretty difficult to maintain your privacy, but what people must understand that in our contemporary society today, it definitely wouldn't be easy, with the government trying it's best to establish control over many aspects of our lives.

Even being forced to do KYC and sending your documents to purchase bitcoin, you can still achieve a pseudo anonymity when buying products.

Let's suppose you bought 10k USD in bitcoin in Coinbase, and you sent your documents there and withdrawal those funds to the address A.

You can just send your coins to a bitcoin mixer (address B), and then the mixer will send you back other coins  (which are not linked to your coins from address B) from address C to your address D.

This way you can achieve some anonymity.

Yes, it is!
But the Bitcoin community is not a homogeneous group. There are those who use Bitcoin out of idealism and those will certainly not do KYC's. There are alternative platforms where you don't need a KYC, but they are usually technically more complex to use.
On the other hand, there are the opportunists. Those who want to make quick as money with Bitcoin. For them the original idea of Bitcoin is of little or no importance. They have no problem to make a KYC everywhere where a little profit can be made.

Speaking of mixers, who are the most trusted and larger volume mixers these days?  It's been a while, and tbh I've always been very nervous about them wrt exit scams or other vulnerabilities.

What do you mean by "anti-enthical"?Can you elaborate more on this term?
KYC regulations apply to all financial services.Which government regulations are "ethical" and which are "anti-enthical"?The law is what it is and we have to follow the rules,even though some of rules are BS.
KYC is required when you open a bank account or a forex trading account in fiat currency.
We all want the crypto industry to be viewed by the government as a legit and legal industry.
If we want mass crypto adoption and legalization,this is the price we have to pay.
If you are complaining about not being anonymous,then why don't you use you a privacy coin like Monero.

Bitcoin is the currency which is known for decentralization. But it is about your priorities. There are so many exchanges which are centralized and need kyc . If you need privacy then you can use it by decentralized method . But i think so many people don't want that anyone know about his portfolio .so everyone can get benefits by the decentralization. And if you want to be centralized then you should use exchanges which need kyc .

I believe anti-ethical is the wrong term. Centralized services are merely protecting their business. But if KYC, if possible, was coded in the protocol itself, and the developers claim "freedom", "hard money", "anti-censorship", then yes that would be anti-ethical.

To remain anonymous is only possible if people will not convert Bitcoin to Fiat. All things change when Fiat is already involved since it was already covered by the law. Since Bitcoin is a cryptocurrency, Businesses that accepting it needs to abide the AML policy to all there customer just have there business permit to operate. The idea of being anonymous Bitcoin is only within the Bitcoin blockchain itself and not on the outside market.

Yeah, there are other ways especially some p2p exchanges that don't require kyc for you to trade or buy BTC but isn't this whole idea of people being strict about doing kycs that makes it more concerning for others to believe that bitcoin is mostly used for bad transactions? I do understand that there has been negative news also about what happens to some people's Docs. but overall I don't see anything bad with KYC but don't do KYC on every site though.

KYC is not a bad thing. If you don't want to use services that require it then you don't.
Depending on where you live there are plenty that do not require it.
There are exchanges for other coins, ways of getting cash, gift cards and just about anything else that do not require your info.

IF on the other hand you want a regulated environment with more rules and security, then yes you are going to wind up with KYC.
I can go to localcryptos.com and get cash for my BTC, and hope everything goes smoothly (it usually does) OR I can go to Gemini give up my personal info and know that it will go smoothly.
The choice is up to you.

-Dave

Not your keys not your coins. So you control what you do with either custodial or non-custodial wallets. Non-custodial wallets are ones to be chosen and used.

You can choose wallets with Tor connection and Coin Join transaction feature.

If you don't want to do KYC but still be able to buy or sell Bitcoin, do it on DEX or Peer to peer marketplace

Notyourkeys.org (https://notyourkeys.org/)
Recommended wallets (https://www.lopp.net/bitcoin-information/recommended-wallets.html)
[BIG LIST] Buy/Sell Crypto (OTC, P2P, DEXs, CEXs, NO-KYC, ATMs, etc.) (https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=5270416)
Help: A list of LocalBitcoin alternatives (P2P marketplaces) (https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=5224711.0)

I can't decide. Bitcoin itself isn't fully anonymous neither. So when you say if KYC is non-ethical to bitcoin, It don't have a clear answer. If you said monero instead of bitcoin then I would say "yes" without a doubt.

Regardless of the project though, I don't like KYC in crypto. Crypto isn't something that needs a government support. It is not a bank. So KYC makes no sense.

Noncustodial wallets, mixing or privacy coins. The important steps are how to broadcast your transactions. Wallet itself can not protect your privacy or anonymity.

[Guide] Decent mixing methods (https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=5146241.0)

Like or dislike, we will have to accept because more exchanges will be required to implement KYC by government command.

Ahh, yeah the typical person never will as long as they are not earning in millions from the crypto. Lolz. Well, this is good one because I literally never cared for privacy of documents which I was uploading on the exchangers because I have always learnt about the exchanger first then did that action. I know there are many ways peeps can get screwed for uploading their KYC docs for example, ICO verification, airdrop verification etc. But obviously it is stupid to upload the docs to newly formed companies who are having fake profiles everywhere.

Here we are talking about crypto space where we have to buy pre-existing coins like Bitcoin, which is available everywhere and can easily bought with p2p, or trusted exchangers or even friend to friends to transfer for that matter.

As of me, I am not concerned at all.

This is a very good point here. Once more people are in on bitcoin then we can utilize buying and selling OTC (Over  The Counter) much easier. 

As of right now I don’t think it’s that huge of a deal that companies are demanding KYC, as if they didn’t I think most governments would shut down exchanges.

In some cases, we have to come to terms with KYC requirements. Although a certain degree of anonymity is indeed inherent in decentralized cryptocurrency, it can only walk on the territory of certain states. And states do not like the circulation of large flows of money from unknown persons with unknown purposes. Therefore, in June 2019, the international financial group FATF adopted binding recommendations by states that KYC can be used only for the purpose of preventing money laundering and combating the financing of terrorism and only if transactions exceed one thousand euros.
So far, not many states have legalized cryptocurrency, and we still have the opportunity to trade cryptocurrency anonymously. In the future, these opportunities will decrease.

Exactly thats right on point. When you bring in fiat currencies you will need to comply with its issuing government's laws. In the purest form, BTC is meant to be obtained by mining and used as currency among the people, exchanges changed it all when you could "buy/sell" BTC with fiat currency.

There are still ways to avoid KYC while using fiat by doing OTC P2P trades, there are also DEX such as Bisq where you can do P2P trades online which the need of KYC like it was the case with localbitcoins back in the day.

It just depends where you want to buy it. Because blockchain is censorship-resistant, transacting any cryptocurrency doesn't actually need any special identity verification. All you have to sacrifice is to pay a fee to the miner.

However, people limit themselves by relying on a centralized entity facilitated by the government. Yep, they have not left the traditional way completely and are not confident to be independent.

The reason why some people dislike submitting AML/KYC documents regardless of net worth is because database leaks do happen even if a certain company/platform is 100% totally legitimate.

But yea, if you’re fine with the risks, then you do you.

If you use a centralized exchange, then you hand out many, important, personal stuff such as who you are. While you may achieve a significant proportion of anonymity (using CoinJoins, mixers etc.), it's still not enough to cover your untraceability. The fact that you've given away where you live, your phone number, your credit card / bank account, your identity etc., says a lot by itself. Those individuals behind the exchange can sell your info to even chain analysis companies.

So, I'd say that beyond purchases of cryptocurrencies, you should be really aware of who you're giving this sensitive information. Especially when you want to retain anonymity.

If we think of bitcoin originally, it says freedom is what bitcoin brings, and for that being anonymous is free. But i think with a lot of exchanges that we have right now which are mostly centralized, then submitting a KYC form is a must and they say its all for security reason. Although we still have some exchanges who are not requiring KYC, but most of them are not even reputable. So the risk will be much even higher.

For me, although its really quite unethical when we think of bitcoin with KYC, but if we want more efficient and secured transactions, then keeping your privacy may not be fully realized as it is. So just always be cautious and even careful on the exchanges you are submitting your KYC, as sharing your private datas may be quite dangerous to think particularly if you are a bag holder of bitcoin.

OP I'm assuming you mean antithetical and not anti-ethical, but anyway, KYC doesn't compare well with BTC, they're two different ideas. KYC refers to an abstract concept involving anonymity, and Bitcoin itself isn't truly anonymous. Every transaction is logged publicly. To the extent you don't need KYC to own a bitcoin wallet is the line where your anonymity ends. Bitcoin is "more private" than traditional banking, I'm not arguing otherwise, but crypto mixers exist for a reason.

Yes, it is almost impossible for KYC not to be related to BTC. I think because we are in a rule that has been made to cause a sense of security and comfort (the rulegiver) even though sometimes it is very contradictory. We need the market, the market needs us, the market is subject to the rules, we are forced to submit to the rules by the market. If I didn't need it it seemed like I'd be out of this circulation, but it doesn't seem like I could yet. Conversely, if we break the rules then we lose, besides that we also feel uncomfortable with the security of our data. Something difficult.

Yes. I also think that even how reputable the exchanges are, they are still not exempted from all forms of data hacking or stealing. So there are still risk every time you share your private datas on any exchanges you wish.

However, while most of us are still concern with this anonymity, others are not thinking of it anymore as long as they are making profits, then regardless of how many times they will submit KYC form. Better accept the fact that bitcoin is considered not totally decentralized these days, unethical to think but that's the fact.

Yes, KYC is not mandatory everywhere and you can choose to do it or not, though in some cases can severely limit one's choices.
As explained above, in some instances it is not about the KYC itself for one platform but more to do with the data leak.

As for the need to KYC, you can imagine that even for a decentralised structure like Bitcoin some platforms can't get away without KYC-ing their customers for providing certain services to them, and Bitcoin like most of the other crypto unfortunately falls into this category

Many here agree that it's anti-ethical, but I'm not sure if I do. I'm not a fan of KYC, but Bitcoin wasn't created with anonymity in mind, and one could argue that transparency is more important. So KYC can be seen as acceptable as a way toward even more financial transparency. Moreover, you don't need to go through KYC to use Bitcoin. Many exchanges require KYC, but it doesn't mean it's impossible to avoid it, and owning a BTC wallet without any ID, sending BTC payments directly to others' addresses, is not a hard thing to do. I think that treatment of currencies should be fair, and what applies to fiat should apply to cryptos. What I don't like is when it's possible to exchange fiat using cash without providing an ID up to a certain amount of money, and yet some crypto exchanges impose KYC regardless of a sum in question.

Yes, certainly it is, the KYC is against the whole base of bitcoin if you ask me, bitcoin was created to provide p2p transactions and economic freedom for people all over the world so everyone in any country with any law and with any religion can use borderless transactions and have his own privacy but the governments and the related organizations are trying hard to force people to pass KYC and provide them personal information but still you can use decentralized exchanges and do anonymous transactions to keep them away.

Arguably, custodial exchanges are antithetical to Bitcoin.  Nowhere in the whitepaper does it say hand your BTC over to strangers on the internet (and you wouldn't be able to buy BTC from exchanges if people weren't doing that).  That was never part of the design.  As others have already said earlier in the topic, it's meant to be used peer-to-peer.  That means no middlemen!

You sadly have to accept the consequences when you freely choose to use it wrong.

You need to do KYC when you are converting BTC to fiat or vice versa as when you are dealing with fiat, government laws would come in. If you want to trade BTC without doing KYC you can use DEX or any P2P marketplace which dont need KYC like Bisq. But I dont think so, KYC is anti-ethical to BTC as BTC was supposed to be mined and traded among other people as currency, not to traded for fiat currencies.

It's hard to purchase a crypto but once you are into cryptos doing transaction in Cryptos only it's not really that difficult to maintain this pseudoidentity, I personally feel that this KYC thing is somewhat necessary too because of scams and hacks that are happening around these days, and pseudo identity isn't really a very big requirement for 80% of the people, they are pretty okay with anyone knowing about their identity online and where they pay.

Everyone talks about privacy but the point is not only about privacy, giving or not your personal info. It's also about the fact that you use a 3rd party to make a deal/transaction and that's exactly what Satoshi wanted to avoid.
A transaction from Alice, directly to Bob. Not Alice sends a transaction to ABCDcompany that checks the payment and then forwards it to Bob after checking, again, some info on Bob.
ABCD company can be a bank or any financial institution, an exchange platform, a person acting as a middleman,...


This.
It could be probably better to use the term "against the ideology" but I agree with you on protecting their business. But that's not as if we didn't have any alternative to centralized platforms. The person using such are simply people who don't really give a fuck to some part of the ideology


Not true.
banknotes can be anonymous. Gold, and other metals too

Agree on this one and thanks to government on centralizing on everything that deals with cryptocurrency specially with Bitcoin and that do really sucks big time.
It might not be ethical but what can we do? Aside from p2p which is risky to do so we don't have any options but to deal with those platforms or
exchange on where we could buy bitcoin.
The only way to make yourself anonymous is to make use of those mixers or changing up wallets.

Yes.
It's all due to government restrictions and the exchanges are just following what the government mandates them. As mentioned, you will still be able to find some ways of doing it anonymously. But are people would care about what's being proud of by the early bitcoin folks about anonymity? What matters to these days especially to the new investors is bitcoin itself is an investment and that's it.

It was inevitable and logical if you really think about it. I think that cryptocurrency has many useful purposes, however you'd have to be blind or ignorant if you expected criminals not to abuse it eventually. The average person is safer in the long run if you're able to see inputs and outputs. I don't frankly see much importance in anonymity unless you have something to hide and the majority of Bitcoiners will be working with traceable funds anyway. If you're trying to withdraw money after a large increase in value then it's fair that you should pay any local taxes that might be due because they help maintain the society that you're in. That generally leaves people who are trying to clean or move funds that do not belong to them into fiat currency and adding KYC actually benefits authorities in pursuing this type of thief.

Right. Since they are centralized, so they are bound to follow the rules made by the government. For me, if its just for security reasons, then i think there's no problem about that. But knowing that we are giving our personal identities, then the essence of turning into bitcoin so we can be anonymous will already be lost. Or does it really matter nowadays? Maybe for early adopters here, yes it is, but for newcomers i doubt if they are still thinking or even affected by it. As long as we can gain crypto, well that's all that matters.

I think that's a little bit closed-minded. Sure, transacting by using a third party definitely goes against the “ideology” of this innovative technology, but the thing is that you have to buy those coins from somewhere.

You may choose to not leave another one hold them, but you need an exchange to accomplish your purchase. The great downside is that you'll have to hand out this personal information in order to get your coins. So, you're already starting eponymously.

I think what they say is the transition from bitcoin to fiat. That a third party is required.

In every setting, a certain sacrifice is needed before the mainstream or adoption happens and this is something that has been discussed some times ago on this forum. However, it was the increase of crypto theft that make SEC to introduced KYC/AML to the exchange, and every exchange site that wants to keep operating must abide by the command.
Despite that, it's not hard to buy BTC without KYC but you have a price to pay for your anonymity though.

I don't think, I'm close-minded in my speech? Everyone can buy his first BTC without a third party. The majority prefer to use an exchange, or anything similar because they can do it easily online as 1,2,3. It's about convenience, yes maybe, but it has a cost.
I don't know if I shall say they're lazy, don't take the time, or are not well informed but you can truly purchase BTC directly peer to peer.



And that's why I replied "not true" because it isn't. But for the same reasons above, people don't want to spend time looking at how to do it.

How many of us are dealing without a 3rd party, whenever it's to buy, sell, or simply live the crypto life? We don't do any type of magic. By using a third party, there is also a long-term effect. Since people use such solutions, this is exactly why we see more and more restrictions of various kinds (laws, AML, or other things).

Honestly, people talk a lot about decentralization and privacy, but they're the first to use centralized platforms and give them their personal documents. (Isn't it funny?)
The newbies entering the crypto world then think it's how it's work and how to do it. While in reality, it's not true. We should rather show them the true road of Bitcoin.

What's the sense to buy a decentralized currency but to use a centralized platform. Better to keep using fiat and your bank account, your debit card, and your cheque.

Ah, I know the answer. Follow the money.
It's to speculate and to make cash.

It finally shows people are interested only in speculation and not really in the ideology behind Bitcoin.
Sad but true.

Whether we like it or not, it certainly comes that all exchanges and even P2P transactions will ask KYC. As the more scamming and hacking incidents happen, the more it pushes through and we started to feel it now. SEC will probably set strict rules and regulations in regards to KYC and live no chance to keep anonymous. But if this will be the solution to move fast the adoption, I guess, it needs our support as well.

Unfortunately, we can't avoid this KYC now. Because for local exchanges or other crypto businesses to be legit, they need to be under the government's approval.
And since they need to implement the AML laws, they need to know the identity of their clients, and one way, is really require their KYC details.
So even if we say it is not the original purpose of btc, if we want adoption, we can't avoid this to happen.

It is not hard. If you don't like KYC, you can trade it on DEX such as Pancakeswap or Uniswap. KYC is only required for CEX, they use KYC for security purposes. I think we cannot blame them, they have the right to apply KYC. I think they are not trying to kill the anonymity on Bitcoin, they just ensure no problems on their exchanges. By applying KYC, they fight money laundering and fraudsters.

Well, there's nothing new with all these exchanges as they always follow what the government told them. And i think they are just doing what centralized exchanges should do. And as a trader, if you want to keep your privacy, then you have all the choices you want. There are still some good exchanges who are not requiring KYC. But we can't deny the fact that maybe in the near future, we can no longer see exchanges who are not asking for KYC as most of the exchanges nowadays are becoming centralized. So better get used to it.

From an individual perspective it's anti-ethical, but looking at the big picture it's not, because we live in centralized countries ruled by centralized entities. To be allowed inside these socities, bitcoin needs to be adapted to the local rules, like anyone and anything else.

Furthermore I must say regulations such as KYC aren't totally bad, although I personally don't like them and wouldn't like them to be necessary. However we need to be realistic and confess KYC procedure helps authorities fight illegal activity easier and crypto businesses to stay legit as they have a compromise not only with their customers, but also with the local laws of the territory where they operate from.

This probably became one of the hindrance for mainstream adoption as well. The narrative on BTC before big personalities and institutions came into the picture is black market or dark web since transactions on Bitcoin network are private. Common people won't buy and use it since they are scared to be involved or associated with illegal activities.

"Anti-ethical" is a strange choice of words, and something that is not ethical is usually called "unethical" or "immoral". KYC is against the values that Bitcoin represents - self-sovereignty, control over own money, avoiding trusted third parties and their risks. But at the same time, control over your money means that you are free to hold your bitcoins on some custodial wallet that requires KYC. It's not a good idea, but you are free to do it.

KYC defeats the purpose of bitcoin, yes. Though with the current state of developments surrounding cryptocurrencies, and the legal framework existing to cater them, I can say that there's not much we can do about KYC. There are still no-KYC platforms though, but they impose a certain limit on the amount you can trade/buy with them, and that sucks for the most part.

Expect more KYC in the future when the governments figure their shit out, though you can always count on people to go against this amd establish their own decentralized, no KYC platforms.

Actually, there are ways that can help you to stay anonymous, but it will require a lot of effort, accuracy and it may become more expensive. You can use mixers and some private chains such as Monero. I know that even these technologies are not a guarantee as for now, but it least it will help to be more anonymous. What comes to KYC, I go around it, so I use exchanges and platforms that don't require it.

The bitcoin in its initial premises remains the same, nothing has changed, it is a characteristics of bitcoin to be able to be anonymous to a certain point or at least without kyc, today it is an option to choose that situation.

Yes, it is! KYC is super unethical for bitcoin. But it is hard for a common people to buy bitcoin without going through KYC verification unfortunately. That's why we are seeing a sudden rise in SWAP systems and DEXs. But again, you can't use fiat with them so you need to have KYC details to enter into the crypto market in general.

It's unfortunate buy it's a sad reality. This decentralized crypto market is flooded with multiple centralized exchanges who are bound to comply with the government regulations.

Sure it bothers a lot of people, but sometimes you can’t avoid them because they are just everywhere. Bitcoin is meant to be a currency that you would be using and not worry about your privacy at all, but now all these big exchanges (or should I say the cabals of cryptocurrency?) have finally turned it to something else that is totally off, now we are heading down a route that we were not supposed to be at first.

For long, I haven’t been making use of major exchanges when I’m buying or selling cryptocurrencies, rather I have been making use of local exchanges (peer-to-peer) and I have been totally okay with it, because I get what I need.

I too believe KYC is not a bad thing, until it can be used against you. But I don’t mind KYC if we can use an app to reset, then increase Bitcoin’s anon-set, as a KYC preventive mechanism.

If only we can use an off-chain network to do that.

Yes Bitcoin was designed keeping in focus the decentralized and anonymity factor in mind, but due to the government rules and regulations, we can only purchase crypto after kyc on the p2p sites. The sites are boumd to perform the kyc because they think its a way to prevent money laundering.

That is because you are trying to use third-party services that the government already watched and want to know who their customer is. If you do not deal with any of that third parties or keep your bitcoin in your wallet or use DEX or use a third party that does not need KYC, you do not have to send any document of yours to them. But as many of us use our bitcoin to make more money from the exchange or buy something from the online or offline store, that makes us fill KYC and follow the rules. I do not mind doing KYC but I will search for third-party services with good reputations so I do not have to worry about the worst thing that can come anytime.

Yes, it absolutely is.

Look at what the whitepaper says about privacy:

KYC prevents this entirely. You cannot keep your public keys (and by extension, your addresses and transactions) anonymous when a centralized exchange controls all your keys, knows exactly who you are, and hands that data over to massive blockchain analysis companies.

Technically, yes.

But since people have no choice, in most cases, we rely on a third-party service to either buy or sell our cryptos. Somehow, for these businesses to run a legit service, they need to comply with the government's policy and KYC is one of the mandated terms they need to ask their users.

We still have P2P or DEXes out there however, it's no doubt that purchasing crypto in a centralized platform is the most convenient way*.

I don't know if some known exchanges offer anonymity right now especially those who used to be decentralized are now has changed their point of view because the government force them to do so. However, there are few exchanges out there that still exist offer you their service without getting some KYC from you. They are those exchanges that give you a limit if you didn't pass any KYC to them but right now it seems to me like they also getting unto this kind of exchange and they too are now adopting the policy of making obliged the KYC of their users before they can use their service. just like what happened to Binance and other known exchanges that haven't been like that before.

There's no decentralized exchange where we can settle things like buying or selling instantly with our fiat. We need to start from scratch and that's what centralized exchanges do. KYC will now be a part of our crypto journey since in the first place, using them gives convenience to us users.

It's still better to just comply instead with these exchanges terms instead of using non-popular exchanges where the chance of getting scammed or being treated unprofessionally has a high chance.

The exchangers has no option but to follow , even if how they wanted to keep their users anonymous but if the government oblige them then they will tend to follow.
this is how the the market and the service act now, choose only the exchange you think will will favor your needs.
I use exchange now the ask KYC and  also use some that needs  no KYC for my own ways of trading.

Indeed, it is no way ethical to demand identity information from those merely wanting to dispose of their own hard-earned money. It always makes you think that money sitting in your bank account is not actually yours, but somebody else's who has control over you. Money is a system of control, which means the admins of this system can do whatever they want because they command the core of the system. They decide who may enter, who may transact, with whom one may transact, what amount of money one may move, what fee one should pay to make a transaction, on what things one may spend money, etc. In short, you have to ask permission every time you wish to interact with money. Someone gave people completely non-governmental money of a permissionless decentralized nature. But people have gotten so used to the system of control that they continue to ask permission to interact with money.

More, but not all of them. Check out Crypton exchange from Utopia p2p. At first it provided only inner coins: privacy coin Crypton and anonymous stablecoin U USD, but they added Monero recently https://crp.is/exchange/xmr_usdt And as it's a decentralized no KYC exchange, no one could force it to change any rules and no one can block it.

100% to the point said, KYC is already everywhere, it seems that soon we will buy altcoins through global identity checks. Therefore, the crypto community is more fond of decentralized exchanges, even from the point of view of their personal data, no one wants to provide them even when purchasing ordinary goods in "stone" shops for fiat money.

It is. BTC itself isn't 100% anonymous honestly speaking, but you can ramp up the anonymity factor through various methods. For example, P2P exchanges like LocalBitcoins don't require any form of KYC(Upto a certain limit).

That depends. If you want complete anonymity, it is still possible to trade crypto without submitting KYC through exchanges like LocalBitcoins etc. If not, it's better to comply with centralised exchange requirements as you mentioned.

There are DEX'es that is under Ethereum which isn't require KYC to have access on it. Unfortunately Bitcoin doesn't have anything and we can't access it thru DEX'es as they aren't supporting it.

Anti-ethical or not, it doesn't matter anymore I think. What's important is people will have access to Bitcoin and other cryptos even if it costs their information. Lets just take Binance as an example. They are requiring KYC to their users so that they can use their exchange. People don't care about their personal information as long as they will have access into it. Either way, if you don't want to share your personal information then you still have a choice not to.

Well, that doesn't really matter a lot to the newbies. They're only thinking that it won't matter to them and it is completely fine to submit kyc to avoid the hassle.
That's why you'll just see everyone does to comply with the kyc since it's needed to trade and to upgrade some limits as well.

Sorry, I didn't formulate my sayings properly; your speech was as good as it should. What I meant is that people like knowing they're free of obligations. When they keep the keys they feel responsible.

It's also due to this blind hunt of profit you said:

---

I think it's rather the protection they feel when they use a popular exchange. Sure it's the convenience too, but try convincing a get-rich-quicker and here-only-for-the-profits, hashtag to_the_moon guy to transact without this, significant for him, intermediary.

Pure speculation, but for the overwhelming majority I suspect it's all three.

Funny or tragic?

True. Most centralized exchanges use KYC because it is one of the regulations made by the government. The government wants to ensure that there are no misuses of money through exchanges like money laundering or fraudulence. I think they don't do a bad thing here.

Do you mean popular DEX? Yes, those are trusted exchanges that have a good reputation.

I believe there will be always DEX, they won't ask for KYC. There are many people who prefer to trade in DEX. With good demand for DEX, it will survive well for a long time.

I believe it’s debatable. It’s the centralized exchange’s right to ask for identification for a person to use their service, and if you don’t want to give it, then you have the freedom to use another service. If this is the current system we have, we should have the tools to send our UTXOs somewhere to reset, and increase the anon-set. cAPSLOCK has a way. 8)

The truth is that a lot of people don’t even care about privacy these days. As long as it is easy for them, they’re just going to make use of that wallet or exchange. Someone have even asked me once why I’m worried about privacy, stating that the only people who has to worry about privacy are people who engage in illicit business. They’re forgetting that sometimes you also have to be careful and maintain your privacy online, not because you are doing anything bad, but because it is important to an extent.

Your identity can be stolen and used for whatever that you would least imagine. So that’s why it’s very good to maintain privacy. People who try to stay private are not doing so just because they’re doing something bad, some of them just need their Peace of Mind and nothing else.

I don't disagree with that at all. If a private company wants to set ridiculously invasive rules and requirements, they are absolutely free to do so. And if an individual user wants to compromise all their privacy and security by complying with those ridiculous rules, then again they are absolutely free to do so. That doesn't mean it is a good idea, however, and it doesn't stop KYC from being antithetical to the whole point of bitcoin.

This is similar to using a third party payment processor to process your transactions or using a third party web wallet or exchange to hold your coins for you, as both are antithetical to bitcoin and defeat the entire point of not having intermediary third parties. Doesn't mean people won't do it, though.

Well, we all have the choices to make i guess and in the end, one is not force to comply with KYC if he thinks that is unethical. But honestly, time will come that all exchanges will be requiring KYC and by that time, we have no other choices to make if we insist on buying crypto from an exchange. Although its really beyond our privacy but to think that it's only for security reasons on our part, and safety on the exchanges part, i think its not really a bad idea i guess. We just have to be more cautious with that, and make sure that we are not giving our personal identities to those not reputable exchanges.

I don't like it but it appears we're forced to live with it.

In a parallel universe where there were no KYC rules at all, money launderers would probably be transferring millions between crypto and fiat bank accounts and governments would probably introduce a total ban on bitcoin transactions (China has already done exactly that).

If the KYC procedure is something like the one created by Sum&Sub (https://sumsub.com/how-to-pass-verification/) and sold to third parties, then all that's needed is assurances that the third party is securely (and ephermally) storing the documents.

Of course, I do not trust when some unknown company is providing their own KYC verification service because there's no knowing how safely they store the information (and whether they ever delete it).

I also do not like the Coinbase kind of verification where they alert the authorities if the verification fails (and you have >$2000) because it can cause many false positives.

DEXs and peer to peer trading will only become more popular, not less.

There is no security benefit to the individual from completing KYC; only risks.

Every so called "reputable" exchange has still managed to leak customer KYC details through hacking, scamming, or selling.

We're forced to live with it because no one puts up a fight. If everyone who used bitcoin flat out refused to complete KYC at any point, you can guarantee Coinbase and Binance would find a work around and start lobbying governments for change by tomorrow.

Yes, KYC is the governments effort to control crypto for tax and regulation reasons. However I see this effort as an impossible goal achievement because the blockchain community is already far ahead in terms of decentralised finance and decentralised wallets. We already can trade anonymously and in a few years we will have other ways to trade in ways that the government cannot track. KYC is a fruitless attempt at control.

For me, I think that KYC isn't that bad at all, I mean not a lot of people care too much about bitcoin so I really don't see how it's going to be a problem plus with KYC, we can easily dispel the argument that bitcoin funds terrorist due to it's anonymity which isn't true since there's already a KYC.

I believe nothing is “anti-ethical” if if wasn’t forced on the user. It’s your choice to use an exchange, or a service under their terms, and if given no other choice, we have the tools to increase the anon-set. I believe Lightning will become one of these important tools.

I'm not really sure what "anti-ethical" means in this context. I had assumed the OP meant to use the word antithetical.

Still, there are plenty of things which are antithetical to bitcoin which are not forced on the user. The very first line of the whitepaper states that bitcoin should be "purely peer-to-peer" and allow payments "to be sent directly from one party to another without going through a financial institution". Every third party payment processor such as BitPay is antithetical to that aim, since they stop users trading peer-to-peer and require all payments to go through a "financial institution", which in this case is the payment processor. The same can be said for any exchange which allows direct transactions between accounts on their platform. In the same way, completing KYC is antithetical to the aims laid out in the bitcoin whitepaper, as I explained above.

Now, I'm not saying that companies shouldn't be free to offer these services, and I'm not saying that users shouldn't be free to compromise their security and privacy in the name of convenience by using these companies if that is what they want to do, but you can't possibly argue that inserting an unnecessary "trusted" third party financial institution in to your transaction when you otherwise do not need one is in keeping with the philosophy behind bitcoin. (I put "trusted" in quotes because I don't trust a single one of these such companies.)

Bitcoin adoption was difficult at first, so third party wallet providers and exchanges came onto the scene to supposedly help with that, but they killed all pseudo anonymity. So if you are serious about pseudo anonymity, you will have to go the extra mile to protect that. (Mixer Services)

Let's not forget that "Cash" has pseudo anonymity... so it is not something illegal. The problem is ... some people misuse the pseudo anonymity for criminal activities (as with cash) and that has given Bitcoin a bad reputation. (which is not fair at all, because the majority of people use it for legal purposes)  ;)

Although Bitcoin is anonymous, it is not completely anonymous. Others can know your assets through your address. But KYC also has advantages. Some people like this setting.

the implementation of the KYC system is actually aimed at the positive side and the security of the members. because many issues of crime and crypto abuse caused the exchange to implement a KYC system.
when choosing a large exchange you don't need to hesitate to do KYC there because your privacy is definitely maintained and security for your assets can be optimal

even if you wanted or not there are chances that KYC will be needed , when you are using exchange of in gambling site or even in some places where you need to purchase there is KYC obligatory so yes this is part of crypto and no one can escape the idea of Being expose not unless you are completely into Holding for long years.
and yes crypto is not completely anonymous so accept that fact because this is still more secrecy than banking.
at some part this is for our own safety so engage in kyc or leave crypto that's all you have to decide right?

Pseudo anonymity was the vision Satoshi Nakamoto having in mind when developing bitcoin but people in the crypto space do not live in isolation and the exchange as well, we all stay in a society where our Government still wants to regulate us and the exchanges.  For the exchanges to successfully operate they need their costumers to undergo KYC so that the Government will allow them to operate.

How is risking your identity being stolen and becoming liable for thousands of dollars in loans and credit you didn't take out or having your identity used for money laundering in any way good for your security?

Lol. This couldn't be more wrong. Every large exchange has had both customer information and customer assets stolen, hacked, leaked, or sold. You have zero privacy and zero security with a centralized exchange, regardless of how large they are.

It is absolutely not for you own safety, and you have been brainwashed if you truly believe that. It is clearly for government surveillance purposes and centralized exchanges comply so they can continue to exist and make profits. Imagine telling people to leave crypto for trying to use it for what it was designed - peer to peer without any intermediaries. ::)

No it's not about the crime or abuse but it's about the profit. Exchanges probably would not care who uses their platform as long as they gain something from those transactions. It was only after regulators mandating strict measures against money laundering that they started implementing KYC. They have to follow or they will be forced to shutdown.

Bitcoin originally has the redeeming quality of anonymity, however, as time passes by, anonymity isn't really much prioritized by the users most especially the newbies who are only after profit. This is because before even entering crypto, they are used to central organizations that require KYC to be able to use their platform. In addition, to some users, it isn't really much of a big deal even for those who are pioneers in the crypto world. I think it really just boils down to the matter of preferences. There are people who know the risks of KYC, yet they still choose to do it because they have no other choice, otherwise they will not be able to utilize the platform because they will not be verified if they won't undergo such. There are also people who know the risks but don't really mind as long as they benefit. There are also people who just basically go with the flow. The reasons for each one differs and that's totally okay as long as they know they are responsible for whatever will happen to their funds for signing up to such.

There are still exchangers that don't require KYC but there are only a few of them left because of legality issues such as avoiding AMLA and obeying the local government. Anyone could opt to do whatever they think would make their account secure and more convenient while being used because we're all entitled to that. After all, we are not really being forced to undergo such. We still have choices and it just depends on us whether we will prioritize convenience or safeness.

Is it theoretically possible to untangle this chain?   address A-B-C-D and so on.

It depends both on what mixer you use, and how you use the mixer.

First of all, there are a number of mixers which have been proven to be breakable. There is a great write up about this here: https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=5117328.0. The only mixer that user was not able to break was ChipMixer, since they use a unique mixing process when compared to all other mixers.

Secondly, it also depends on how you use the mixer. If you deposit a unique amount of bitcoin to the mixer, let's say 1.376 BTC, and then you immediately withdraw the exact same amount of coins. Someone could reasonably assume those two transactions are linked. If you send your mixed coins back to an address you've already used, or you combine your mixed coins with unmixed coins somewhere down the line, or you send your mixed coins to somewhere you've completed KYC, and so on, then you can completely negate all the benefits the mixer brings. You can also leak information in other ways, such as using custodial wallets or SPV wallets, via your IP address, and so on.

Best practice when using a mixer is to deposit a set amount of coins, and then slowly withdraw different amounts at different times to different places, and make sure you never link mixed and unmixed coins together. Do this over Tor. Run your own node or use a wallet such as Wasabi which protects your privacy.

KYC was never meant to be a part of Bitcoin, but then again, satoshi wasn't talking about Taproot, SegWit, or the Lightning Network either. It's the userbase that decides how Bitcoin will proceed. And the users clearly don't mind using centralized exchanges and payment providers where you exchange your coins for fiat. Whenever fiat is involved, you can expect KYC and AML regulations to be respected.

I don't see it as unethical if you know about the requirement from the beginning. If an exchange requires that you verify your identity, you can either do it, or you can try your luck with a DEX that doesn't request that. In reality, most people will just to what the CEX says and provide them with the info they ask for.

An example of unethical behavior would be an exchange being advertised as not having KYC requirements, but once you deposit some money into it, they ask you to undergo KYC and explain the source of the funds. If the majority of bitcoin users said NO to KYC, CEXs wouldn't hold such a significant position in the whole crypto economy and they would be forced to change their practices. Unfortunately, that won't happen.       

Is it theoretically possible to untangle this chain?   address A-B-C-D and so on.
[/quote]

For common users, if you have a low amount (not thousands of btc) you can get "clean " coins, not attached to you.

You can send 2 Btc to a mixer, For example, and receive several small amount of 0.02 or 0.05 btc, which were never linked to those 2 btc you had. Those small chips come from other addresses,  those are other coins. Then  they are not linked to you.
As o_e_l_e_o said, large amount make jt Harder to mix and someone may break it easier.

KYC Is anti-ethical to bitcoin and harmful to your own privacy, one of the many things whose value you appreciate only when it is gone, probably forever, as it is very difficult to gain it back.

Long time ago, I translated in Italian a good long post by the Italian fellow bitcoiner Giacomo Zucco on this subject.

Have a read here:
A Treatise on Bitcoin and Privacy (https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=5271127)

Yes, it is true that traders need to verify KYC before trading with crypto exchanges. And it is a mandatory step implemented by most of the crypto exchanges. I think safety is the concern here. With these centralised exchanges, your bitcoins are somewhat protected and less prone to attacks and scams.

Attacks and scams is your least concern when you are pertaining for KYC requirements from exchange. This is strictly implemented so that Exchange can trace you in case you deposit money from illegal transaction. Same scenario when the time hacker of a Dapps exploit the pool funds and hacker deposit all the hacked money on a centralized exchange which result for revealing his identity and locked the exchange account. Due to many illegal activity in crypto, Regulators imposed KYC on exchange to still regulate it despite crypto being decentralized in a sense.

In the early days when Bitcoin and other Crypto currencies were still illegal in most countries, hardcore supporters of Crypto currencies believed that it was crucial to protect their Crypto identity to stay Pseudo anonymous to hide from these governments.

We should also note that Fiat (Cash) is also Pseudo anonymous, so it is not something extraordinary that are only applicable to Crypto currencies. We (Crypto community) are only asking to get the same level of Pseudo anonymity, as people using Fiat (Cash) ..but the third parties are the ones destroying people's Pseudo anonymity.  >:(

I think there is a serious flaw in this KYC issue, the flaw is as follows:

if we look at KYC we realize that only customers deliver documents to anonymous sites with anonymous owners and it is not known if our documents will be safe or not. this flaw hurts customers

Just my point as well. I know there are a lot of their places as you have also mentioned that we do KYCs and they don't have a problem with does so why is KYC for Bitcoin a problem if we are not trying to continuously make it look illegal. I personally don't have any problem doing KYC plus everyone has their own opinion about this and I believe that is why some people still see it as something they don't want to invest in.

Centralized exchanges have been responsible for the vast majority of stolen bitcoin and stolen data over the years. They are provably the most risky place to leave your coins.

Once again, refusing KYC and/or wanting to maintain some financial privacy does not mean you are doing anything illegal. Believing that privacy is a crime is buying in to government propaganda used to create surveillance states.

Lots of people don't make a fuss with KYC in the fiat sector because it is impossible to interact with the fiat sector without KYC. You cannot open a bank account, take out a loan, or obtain any sort of credit, without completing KYC. You cannot work most jobs without having a KYC-ed bank account in which to receive your pay. We don't like it, but it is necessary if you want to use fiat. However, none of this is necessary with bitcoin. You can open a wallet, buy/sell/trade bitcoin, earn bitcoin, hold bitcoin, spend bitcoin, swap bitcoin, do anything at all you want with bitcoin without ever completing KYC. KYC is completely unnecessary and is being forced upon us by governments which want to spy on you and track your behavior.

Uuhm, anonymous sites with anonymous owners? A truly centralized exchanges doesn’t have anonymous owners, when you go to their website you would see a page where they display the team that are working in the exchange. You can take Coinbase as an example, they are not hiding anything about their team and their location, they list their top team members and also their CEO so that you get to know them, and also where their office is located.

This is also the same with other centralized exchanges and wallets that I know. Anyone that is anonymous and showing it's team, then it’s likely that they just want to steak your information.

Bitcoin ifself is anonymous, but centralized exchange are not. They need legalization to keep opened because there are a rules from their government. I think we user don't have much other options beside use decentralized exchange, or maybe P2P, so i think if people don't like to do KYC, they still can buy or sell their coins as long they use trustful decentralized exchanges.

How you could say exchanges are anonymous sites!
In what way you could say the owners of the exchange are anonymous!

Most people use Binance, Bittrex, Coinbase exchanges for trading, the owner of these websites is not anonymous at all, everyone knows them.
Another issue is that Bitcoin has not yet been fully adopted, and no government would want to legalize Bitcoin without KYC. so everyone should not oppose government work, for the sake of adoption. You know, anyone can do Bitcoin transactions anonymously without KYC if he has little knowledge about Bitcoin, so we shouldn't oppose the work of Govt.

KYC is like the antithesis to bitcoin on the aspect of privacy. It defeats the purpose of being pseudoanonymous, although of course it's a compromise we 'had' to accept if we want bitcoin to get legitimate in the eyes of the government. We can still support and promote decentralized exchanges, although it will need a lot more volume and attention, plus more beneficial features that can be better than on centralized exchanges.

One of the reasons bitcoin attracted many people at the beginning of its release was because bitcoin was anonymous, but along with the increasing popularity of bitcoin, it is also possible that one day bitcoin's original anonymity will also fade because regulators issued by each country force us bitcoin users to reveal his real identity (KYC) so like it or not of course we are forced to do this so that bitcoin is legalized in our country.

You can still use and combine some decentralized exchanges, social media platforms ,mixers,  even some gambling sites and  P2P in order to get the crypto without doing the KYC but the process will be complex and not easily understood by a layman or the one who is new in the crypto.

There is pressure from the governments to make the KYC mandatory and hence the famous centralized exchanges won't allow you to buy bitcoin or make P2P transactions without KYC.

Kyc is actually one of the things bitcoin came to battle;
But bitcoin it's didn't come without his own problems;
It came with advanced scam and lots more;
Then kyc poss to be fighting scammers;
But it has been proven to be most cases a scam itself;
Then, it all goes down to what the bitcoin user wants;
You can chose to avoid kyc and still use bitcoin.

Bitcoin was invented as a transfer of value between people directly, without the involvement of a third part. That is, if bitcoin is considered money, then in such a system you do not need a bank to make payments. Any bank requires proof of identity. In a bitcoin system, you don't need a bank from the beginning. So there is no need for a KYC.

You are only going to be asked for KYC when you’re making use of all these custodial wallets and you are trying to buy Bitcoin. I do use some of those custodial wallets and the requirements to make use of them are usually too much, and when you try to make a purchase you’re also going to be required to do another registration if their supplier is a third party website.

But, when you’re making use of decentralized wallets or exchanges, you don’t need any form of that and the buying and selling is usually straight to the point. But the good thing about these centralized exchanges and wallets is that you’re protected as a user, which is unlike decentralized ones where you might be taking some risks.

We can transfer bitcoin from wallet to wallet many times, but when it comes to making payments for goods or services, given that direct payment with bitcoin is not possible everywhere, we will need to transfer funds to fiat. And for this, it is necessary to use cryptocurrency exchanges and the banking system so that the amount in fiat goes to our bank account. States must fight money laundering and terrorist financing. In any case, demanding in this case the identification of users, they refer to this. Therefore, whether we like it or not, if we want the legalization of cryptocurrency, we will have to put up with KYC requirements when fiat comes into contact with cryptocurrency.

I do consider that it is antithetical, because BTC was created so that neither governments nor banks would get their hands on our money, our money in the traditional economy has always been managed by banks and for this reason is that now there are so many problems with the governments seeking regulations for BTC and crypto, this is something that should not be allowed because there are many ways to bypass prohibitions and governments and banks always think about making money just for themselves and do not think about the situation of each person, I am particularly in favor of Each person has the right to their money and the amount they want to move from one place to another. I think that was one of Satoshi's premises.

The orginial theme and concept of bitcoin was to provide the anonymity but all humans are not perfect. There are people who try to take advantage of this and may involve in illegal activities. In order to minize the risk, the centralized exchangess have no option but to enforce kyc.
Yes, many people dont like this and have no bad intent also, but we have to comply to this kyc requirement.

It's hard but not impossible. The reason why almost every exchange requires KYC, is because of fierce government regulations. After all, the government wants to keep track of what people do with Bitcoin. They justify their actions by saying that they're preventing money laundering and terrorist financing. But we all know their true intentions. Unfortunately, the average person will be forced to provide ID documents to a centralized exchange since it's the easiest way to get access to Bitcoin. Decentralized exchanges, P2P trading platforms, and atomic swaps don't require KYC, but they're somewhat-complicated to use.

While KYC is "anti-ethical" to Bitcoin (since it brings back the middleman), the decentralized and open source design of Blockchain tech allows anyone to easily circumvent/bypass government restrictions. All that matters is that Bitcoin remains decentralized and censorship-resistant. As long as it stays that way, governments will find a hard time trying to regulate it. Just my thoughts ;D