Brave, the so called "privacy" browser now requires KYC!

[BrewMaster]

i just found out about it but apparently this has been the plan for some time now. it seems like it was first for publishers to gather BAT tokens and now it is to be enforcd for anybody who wants to use the wallet (Brave Rewards).




it is worth noting that KYC is not requires if you use it as a browser but the question rises, why would you want to use it after this and when there are good browsers like Firefox available which is the original code of this project?

[1714788157]

1714788157

[AB de Royse777]

why would you want to use it after this and when there are good browsers like Firefox available which is the original code of this project?

I would not.
Lately I was considering to try Brave browser since I was hearing about it a lot but this came out of nowhere LOL

Normally I use Firefox which use tor connection. But these days it is really hard to protect your privacy.

[bitmover]

I always loved bat and brave browser. I just can't believe. I had to go the original website to be sure.

And yes, for content creators this is necessary (not for simple users). even if there is no fiat involved...
But even so, I would not support a Browser doig that. We don't need brave browser, I would support it of it ideology is compatible with mine, about a free and open internet. Which is not. Firefox is

And this is quite old , from November 2018 I saw people complaining in Reddit.

Lots of problems come from this. What about journalism in repressive countries? What's about people who write about cypherpunk moviment and want to stay anonymous?

[o_e_l_e_o]

Really disappointing. I had Brave installed - it's not my main browser, and I don't use it that often, but I certainly had high hopes for its future and was impressed by some of the development that was ongoing. This, however, nullifies all of that. KYC for a company which was pushing their strong focus on privacy is ridiculous and unforgivable. I have already uninstalled.

For anyone thinking of switching away from Brave now (which you should, unfortunately), don't think about switching to Google Chrome. Even if you don't have a Google account, Google use Chrome to track literally everything you do online, and probably have enough data to link it to your real world identity, particularly if you've ever (even once) logged in to Facebook or any other account bearing your real name.

Firefox and Tor should remain your browsers of choice.

why would you want to use it after this and when there are good browsers like Firefox available which is the original code of this project?

Brave is based on Chromium, not Firefox.

[STFU!]

i just found out about it but apparently this has been the plan for some time now. it seems like it was first for publishers to gather BAT tokens and now it is to be enforcd for anybody who wants to use the wallet (Brave Rewards).




it is worth noting that KYC is not requires if you use it as a browser but the question rises, why would you want to use it after this and when there are good browsers like Firefox available which is the original code of this project?

i had uninstal my Brave Browser since they asking me doing KYC when using Uphold wallet. i had nothing to hide and honestly KYC needed to prevent someone from committing a crime , but bad news is when your Data being Sold? that's not a wise option.

[Mahanton]

One of my browsers that do seldom use.I have chrome,firefox,microsoft edge,IE,Opera and this one Brave.I have installed this one yet its getting been known and now they are asking KYC? Directly uninstalled when i do read up this thread.

[PassThePopcorn]

So tldr of this thread is everyone doesn't want to provide kyc for virtual currency, they never required it unless you want to be paid.

[1miau]

A very disappointing move of Brave, I thought (hoped) it's an April fool  

Seriously, I don't get it why they require KYC out of nowhere... the amount of coins earned there is tiny and at least Brave can set a withdrawal limit per month / year where you can only withdraw that limit. Such a decision would be much better for a browser advertising for its privacy...
Are terrorists using brave Browser to fund their attacks? Or a criminals laundering money with Brave browser? Really?!


https://brave.com/
How could I enjoy private browsing with KYC?!  
Big joke, nah!

A Browser advertising with privacy and then requiring KYC, isn't it a contradiction?  


Looks like I'm going to keep using Firefox...

[TryNinja]

Where did you see that? I'm using Brave right now and I don't see them asking for KYC anywhere. Actually, I just opened the rewards tab and they gave me free 4 BAT.

edit: all I could find is KYC for publishers[1] (owners of websites that want to receive BATs)

[1] https://community.brave.com/t/uphold-kyc-know-your-customer-verification-is-now-required-in-order-to-receive-bat-publisher-payouts/42035

[tomahawk9]

it is worth noting that KYC is not requires if you use it as a browser

But the subject of this topic is: "browser now requires KYC!"  

But these days it is really hard to protect your privacy.

Not really, it all depends on your threat model and how high it's set.

Where did you see that? I'm using Brave right now and I don't see them asking for KYC anywhere. Actually, I just opened the rewards tab and they gave me free 4 BAT.

Found this on the 'community.brave' main page: https://community.brave.com/t/brave-rewards-user-wallets-a-significant-update/72340

[mk4]

I mean, it's not enforced. You just need KYC if you need to accept the payments. We can still freely use Brave with it's great privacy features without submitting KYC. A very slightly misleading title if you ask me.

While I think this is unfortunate and I don't like KYC as well, but in my understanding, as a registered and regulated company, they really have no choice as they're currently using UpHold. Hopefully this is just a "bandage solution" just to keep the system running right now. Not sure if they're allowed(by law) to distribute the BAT peer-to-peer, but I hope they would be in the future.

why would you want to use it after this and when there are good browsers like Firefox available which is the original code of this project?

Afaik the original codebase is from Chromium not Firefox.

[BrewMaster]

it is worth noting that KYC is not requires if you use it as a browser

But the subject of this topic is: "browser now requires KYC!" 

well, i've already mentioned the problem in the last part but let me expand on it more.
the first time i heard about Brave browser in 2016 it was before it was even released. this browser was introduced as a way you could use bitcoin to both make payments to websites and get paid by them, first one to support them to run ad free and the second to see ads and earn money.

basically it focuses on 3 things:
- the privacy part (like Firefox, and since the dev is Mozilla co-founder which is also why i though the code is the same)
- ad blocking part (like popular ad-ons for Firefox,... like uBlock)
- the bitcoin (and then other cryptocurrency and then the BAT thing in 2018) integration part
people are already using the first 2 in other browsers, so the only reason why they choose Brave is the third option and if they enforece KYC on that then in my view they are practically enforcing it on all their users.

[AB de Royse777]

~snip~
Not really, it all depends on your threat model and how high it's set.

How?
You will ask me to use duckduckgo.com for my search engine? I have no problem to use tor browser in fact I do use firefox with tor connection but asking me to use duckduckgo.com is boring.

I do not like it. The annoying part is that everytime when you are going to search for anything you are starting it from the scratch since the browser does not know anything about your interest, preference. I know that's the goal but these days we are so much addicted with technology that if you ask someone to add 122 + 123 (just picked some random number) then they will look for a calculator.

[eternalgloom]

~snip~
Not really, it all depends on your threat model and how high it's set.

How?
You will ask me to use duckduckgo.com for my search engine? I have no problem to use tor browser in fact I do use firefox with tor connection but asking me to use duckduckgo.com is boring.

I do not like it. The annoying part is that everytime when you are going to search for anything you are starting it from the scratch since the browser does not know anything about your interest, preference. I know that's the goal but these days we are so much addicted with technology that if you ask someone to add 122 + 123 (just picked some random number) then they will look for a calculator.

This is completely off-topic, but I'll respond anyway.
Sure, if you don't mind being tracked by Google and have your data on display for hundreds of advertisers, do use Google.

Though if you care about such things, then you might want to opt for Duckduckgo.

Now, I actually use Duckduckgo myself and it's definitely not quite as good as Google, but also not that bad that you can't use it.

[TryNinja]

How?
You will ask me to use duckduckgo.com for my search engine? I have no problem to use tor browser in fact I do use firefox with tor connection but asking me to use duckduckgo.com is boring.

I do not like it. The annoying part is that everytime when you are going to search for anything you are starting it from the scratch since the browser does not know anything about your interest, preference. I know that's the goal but these days we are so much addicted with technology that if you ask someone to add 122 + 123 (just picked some random number) then they will look for a calculator.

You can choose: either have your privacy or more convenience.

If you let Google track your location 24/7, they will give you cool custom alerts, suggestions, timelines, custom searches, etc... But they need to keep tracking you for that. If you don't mind, sure. But some people prefer to do a hard search on DuckDuckGo than having Google know what you like, think and even the porn you watch. What else do they even do with that data?

About Brave, as long as they don't track me, sell my data or some shady stuff like this, I don't care about what KYC they implement *for publishers only*; If they need to do that in the eyes of the law/government, they will obviously do.

[o_e_l_e_o]

You can choose: either have your privacy or more convenience.

This principle applies to so many things in modern life. A bunch of my friends use various smart home devices - Google, Amazon, whatever. They say it's super convenient: "Add x to my shopping list" or "What's the weather like tomorrow". I say I'd rather spend 10 seconds doing these things myself than having every single word that is every said inside my house being sent to and recorded on who knows how many servers around the world. You like the convenience of connecting with friends on Facebook, Instagram, Snapchat, etc.? Then you are giving away all your data to these companies to use anyway they want and sell to anyone they want.

About Brave, as long as they don't track me, sell my data or some shady stuff like this, I don't care about what KYC they implement *for publishers only*; If they need to do that in the eyes of the law/government, they will obviously do.

I disagree with you here. Even if it doesn't affect me directly, I no longer want to support a browser which advertises itself as having a strong privacy focus, whilst simultaneously mandating KYC for part of their userbase. KYC is completely antithetical to everything they should be standing for.

[TryNinja]

I disagree with you here. Even if it doesn't affect me directly, I no longer want to support a browser which advertises itself as having a strong privacy focus, whilst simultaneously mandating KYC for part of their userbase. KYC is completely antithetical to everything they should be standing for.

I know that. But just like centralized exchanges NEED to implement KYC at some point (due to their government laws) or they will get shutdown, I think Brave actually needs to do that if they want to keep going with their idea of giving BAT tokens to publishers. What else should they do? Just give up on their idea or go against their law enforcement agencies? As long as they have good intentions and only ask for KYC when needed (for publishers in this case) I'm cool with that. But that's me (I also hate KYC btw).

[mk4]

I disagree with you here. Even if it doesn't affect me directly, I no longer want to support a browser which advertises itself as having a strong privacy focus, whilst simultaneously mandating KYC for part of their userbase. KYC is completely antithetical to everything they should be standing for.

As much as I agree with you, I don't think they just have any choice besides going full à la Binance and head over to Malta instead to run away from laws. It's simply just a regulatory requirement for them to let some of their users accept and send BAT tokens in a legal matter. I'm pretty sure they wouldn't do it in the first place if it wasn't enforced. Ultimately, hey, it's optional! We non-BAT users can just freely use the browser freely without any KYC at all.

Again, I hope this KYC thing with Uphold is just mandatory. Hopefully they could let their users accept and send BAT in a protocol level. Though I'm not sure how that's going to work in terms of regulations.

[harizen]

Just installed this Brave browser because of the rewards. Not expecting at all but it's good to have a slight bit of rewards for my browsing experience. Not reading the whole terms yet but obviously, internal transactions involving BAT payments and rewards would be affected by the KYC but still, people can freely use the browser. So for those who earned up rewards decently up to now, no choice but to comply with the KYC or just give up their earned rewards.

I don't want the idea of KYC but will just consider it if I found it necessary to do.

[shield132]

Btw why are governments so quiet? I understood companies want to know their customers and get rid of illegal things without knowing who did that. Maybe it's not related to this topic but just think, why are they in silent? This company operates from USA, almost all of USA exchanges, social networks and etc steal and get our data, so in overall huge data is under control of USA government. Isn't this dangerous for other governments? Especially when one government owns ID documents of your citizens?

[AB de Royse777]

This principle applies to so many things in modern life. A bunch of my friends use various smart home devices - Google, Amazon, whatever. They say it's super convenient: "Add x to my shopping list" or "What's the weather like tomorrow". I say I'd rather spend 10 seconds doing these things myself than having every single word that is every said inside my house being sent to and recorded on who knows how many servers around the world. You like the convenience of connecting with friends on Facebook, Instagram, Snapchat, etc.? Then you are giving away all your data to these companies to use anyway they want and sell to anyone they want.

There is noting free in this world. They let us to use their free product but we pay them without our data.

I think we are living in an age now where more and more people are taking their privacy seriously. But it really comes down to the preference of either choosing privacy or going with easy custom made features designed by the companies to compromise your privacy.

I know that. But just like centralized exchanges NEED to implement KYC at some point (due to their government laws) or they will get shutdown, I think Brave actually needs to do that if they want to keep going with their idea of giving BAT tokens to publishers. What else should they do? Just give up on their idea or go against their law enforcement agencies? As long as they have good intentions and only ask for KYC when needed (for publishers in this case) I'm cool with that. But that's me (I also hate KYC btw).

I have not used their browser so I have no idea about the user friendliness of their service. It seems like KYC is needed only to use the token not for using the browser. So, in my opinion everything comes down to the service they are offering. If they can provide top notch service and if the users find their browser is more comfortable than those exists (like chrome), they will get a group of customers users who will turn to be loyal for them. Not everyone will be interested in their token. So KYC is not going to be needed for all.

[bitmover]

But these days it is really hard to protect your privacy.

Wait, one thing is to protect yourself against tracking cookies , Google ads etc. You may choose to give a fuck about that, and that's ok.

Another very different stuff is requiring passport or driver's licence to be able to use a browser. (Even as a publisher, it was required before)
It's very invasive. That's not a privacy matter anymore, but it also involves your reputation, safety, etc. What are they doing with your passport?

[tomahawk9]

~snip~
Not really, it all depends on your threat model and how high it's set.

How?
You will ask me to use duckduckgo.com for my search engine?

Well, yeah, that would be a good start, but if you don't like DDG, I'd recommend using SearX as a search engine (using a private instance/self-hosted) in the Tor Browser running on QubeOS.

About Brave, as long as they don't track me, sell my data or some shady stuff like this, I don't care about what KYC they implement *for publishers only*; If they need to do that in the eyes of the law/government, they will obviously do.

They won't sell the data to a third party or anything like that because, as it says in the link I posted above in this topic, they don't store the data that you provide, Uphold does since they're the ones who require and will receive the KYC info.

[bitmover]

the biggest issue I see is that companies like Brave are using"privacy" and other cypherpunk fundamentals only as an advertisement. Are they really comprised with that ideals of a Free web?
 I was reading that they allow publishers only to withdrawal funds after kyc, and even so to a custodial service that doesn't allow you to have the privatekeys (uphold "wallet").

That uphold wallet is just another custodial service like Freewallet and so many out there, which will freeze your funds  whenever they want, making your funds hostage until you give them more docs, or more information or whatever.

It's is just a bank, but without all the laws and regulations which also protect us, not only them.

There is no reason to use any of those services, just use a traditional bank or visa and Google ads.

This is why Bitcoin is different from all those companies and cryptocurrencies. Because it is free from all that.

[mk4]

What are they doing with your passport?

I don't think it's that they're going to do something with it per se, but my guess that it's most likely just a requirement from the government, simply because money is involved.

Btw why are governments so quiet? I understood companies want to know their customers and get rid of illegal things without knowing who did that. Maybe it's not related to this topic but just think, why are they in silent? This company operates from USA, almost all of USA exchanges, social networks and etc steal and get our data, so in overall huge data is under control of USA government. Isn't this dangerous for other governments? Especially when one government owns ID documents of your citizens?

They're aren't actually quiet lately. Have you seen the recent senate committee hearing concerning Libra? It was almost all attacks on Zuckerberg and Facebook that they didn't keep their word concerning their user's data.

Also, it's not like Uphold is requiring KYC for their financial gain. It's most likely because it's a regulatory requirement.

the biggest issue I see is that companies like Brave are using"privacy" and other cypherpunk fundamentals only as an advertisement. Are they really comprised with that ideals of a Free web?
 I was reading that they allow publishers only to withdrawal funds after kyc, and even so to a custodial service that doesn't allow you to have the privatekeys (uphold "wallet").

Yes. It's actually a good browser for privacy purposes due to it's tracker blocking features. Also, it's open source.

And again, the KYC requirements are more likely for regulatory requirements. Because yes, the company runs in San Francisco CA.

[o_e_l_e_o]

But just like centralized exchanges NEED to implement KYC at some point (due to their government laws) or they will get shutdown, I think Brave actually needs to do that if they want to keep going with their idea of giving BAT tokens to publishers.

It's simply just a regulatory requirement for them to let some of their users accept and send BAT tokens in a legal matter.

Do we know why, though? There are hundreds of exchanges which trade crypto without involving fiat, which don't need KYC. There are crypto gambling sites which don't need KYC. Why is Brave, which also doesn't touch fiat, different?

There is noting free in this world. They let us to use their free product but we pay them without our data.

There are actually quite a lot of free services which will respect your privacy. Tails, Firefox, Tor, DDG. Have a look here for privacy respecting alternatives to most pieces of software: https://prism-break.org/

[tomahawk9]

Isn't this dangerous for other governments? Especially when one government owns ID documents of your citizens?

It's not just USA, other governments do the same. Here, you might find this interesting: https://restoreprivacy.com/5-eyes-9-eyes-14-eyes/

TL;DR: US and other countries share and collect data of their citizens (even citizens from countries that are not part of the international alliance) between them.

[ABCbits]

I thought Brave could be privacy-respecting browser for non-geek or technical illiterate, but looks like i was wrong.
They should know they'll be forced to apply KYC on their browser, maybe they shouldn't push their BAT too hard.

Anyway, it's unfortunate to see they prioritize BAT rather than their original goal which shown on their homepage.

There is noting free in this world. They let us to use their free product but we pay them without our data.

There are actually quite a lot of free services which will respect your privacy. Tails, Firefox, Tor, DDG. Have a look here for privacy respecting alternatives to most pieces of software: https://prism-break.org/

Only because someone else "pay" for all of us in form of donation, source-code contributor, tester, host mirror server (such as mirror of linux software repository) and run node (such as Tor relay)

[LTU_btc]

I think topic title is a bit clickbait. Regular users of Brave browser aren't required to pass KYC. Only publishers will have to that. Still, browser which focus on privacy and KYC is strange. And I suppose that one day they may ask their regular users to pass KYC... I haven't used Brave browser, but I believed that's very promising project with great future. Now I have mixed feelings about it.

[malevolent]

There are already people on brave forums saying they can't pass verification because they're from 'bad' countries (Iran) or they don't even know why because Uphold won't tell them. If you actually want to make use of BAT you're at the whim of an unrelated company. All this could have been avoided if they just moved to a free country line Binance did.

[pugman]

Well all of the good things I was talking about brave. For fuck sake.

I love brave, not gonna lie, its really good, and it doesn't crash as often as Chrome certainly. But it certainly does suck that they are asking for KYC for BAT payments, that's very sucky of them.

I disagree with you here. Even if it doesn't affect me directly, I no longer want to support a browser which advertises itself as having a strong privacy focus, whilst simultaneously mandating KYC for part of their userbase. KYC is completely antithetical to everything they should be standing for.

Yeah well we don't live in a perfect world, and if a company wants to integrate crypto payments whilst operating or having its users living in a country that requires KYC, they have to abide by their terms regardless of what they focus point of the company is. Its literally impossible for any corporate to integrate crypto payment mechanisms without asking for user's KYC. With the amount of people getting scammed, people are willing to give their KYC to corporate companies for additional security. In fact, many people don't understand how valuable KYC actually is, so privacy for them doesn't matter..

[1Referee]

And I suppose that one day they may ask their regular users to pass KYC...

It will happen, I am 100% certain of that. The whole idea that you are being paid out in this manner just by installing an app without filling in personal information, is something that governments don't like. They want to know who is being paid out, and then what they will be doing with their funds. Currently that's not the case and it's only a matter of time before Brave will comply.

Brave is a business. It's subject to regulations set up within the countries they operate in. They either abide or be forced to halt operations. I know what option they will choose.

I haven't used Brave browser, but I believed that's very promising project with great future. Now I have mixed feelings about it.

It's a promising project until you get to deal with the legal side of operating a business. Governments are catching up on the developments here quicker than ever before. I expect way more similar moves that will force seemingly innocent crypto businesses to comply and lose their main use case now people have to do KYC.

[mk4]

It's simply just a regulatory requirement for them to let some of their users accept and send BAT tokens in a legal matter.

Do we know why, though? There are hundreds of exchanges which trade crypto without involving fiat, which don't need KYC. There are crypto gambling sites which don't need KYC. Why is Brave, which also doesn't touch fiat, different?

I think it's mostly due to the locations of these services. KuCoin, Huobi, Binance, outside of the United States, whereas Brave is. Also, they gotta make sure they're tightly following regulations. I mean, they have Brendan Eich himself as the founder and CEO. They definitely wouldn't want to ruin the reputation of such a big name not only in the crypto space, but also in the tech industry in general. Just my guesses though.

[malevolent]

I think it's mostly due to the locations of these services. KuCoin, Huobi, Binance, outside of the United States, whereas Brave is. Also, they gotta make sure they're tightly following regulations. I mean, they have Brendan Eich himself as the founder and CEO. They definitely wouldn't want to ruin the reputation of such a big name not only in the crypto space, but also in the tech industry in general. Just my guesses though.

Isn't his reputation in the tech industry already tarnished due to his political beliefs and activities? Asking for KYC won't ruin someone's reputation in the cryptocurrency space, at least not in 2019, but it definitely leaves a sour taste in the mouth, when they could have relocated to a friendlier jurisdiction.

[mk4]

Isn't his reputation in the tech industry already tarnished due to his political beliefs and activities?

No idea about that. I don't think his opinions should be used against him in the tech industry though(depends hugely on how bad his opinions are though).

Asking for KYC won't ruin someone's reputation in the cryptocurrency space, at least not in 2019, but it definitely leaves a sour taste in the mouth, when they could have relocated to a friendlier jurisdiction.

No I wasn't talking about the KYC. I was speaking more of that he wouldn't want his reputation tarnished if ever the government whoops their ass because they didn't follow regulations. And yea, I think they should've relocated instead too. The US is pretty tight. Maybe not in Malta, but probably a country like Japan perhaps.

[malevolent]

No idea about that. I don't think his opinions should be used against him in the tech industry though(depends hugely on how bad his opinions are though).

In 2014 he got kicked out of Mozilla for donating to political cause against same-sex marriage several years earlier.

Asking for KYC won't ruin someone's reputation in the cryptocurrency space, at least not in 2019, but it definitely leaves a sour taste in the mouth, when they could have relocated to a friendlier jurisdiction.

No I wasn't talking about the KYC. I was speaking more of that he wouldn't want his reputation tarnished if ever the government whoops their ass because they didn't follow regulations. And yea, I think they should've relocated instead too. The US is pretty tight. Maybe not in Malta, but probably a country like Japan perhaps.

I just brought that up as something that doesn't exactly reflect very well on him, as the whole Brave browser and BAT project gave out a very different impression when they were first announced.

[Freewallet]

That uphold wallet is just another custodial service like Freewallet and so many out there, which will freeze your funds  whenever they want, making your funds hostage until you give them more docs, or more information or whatever.

Hi bitmover,

As we can see from our previous dialogue, we could never agree on the point deeming our actions as arbitrary.
Since our brand name is mentioned in this message, we've decided to stress it again.

As always, we are always here to assist our customers in all issues that can arise in this regard or in any other matter.

[o_e_l_e_o]

Only because someone else "pay" for all of us in form of donation, source-code contributor, tester, host mirror server (such as mirror of linux software repository) and run node (such as Tor relay)

True, but it's not like you are being forced in to either paying or giving up your privacy. Thanks to the work of other generous individuals, you can keep your privacy intact without having to spend a penny.

if a company wants to integrate crypto payments whilst operating or having its users living in a country that requires KYC, they have to abide by their terms regardless of what they focus point of the company is.

That's fine, and if they want to go to the KYC route, that's fine too. But they can't then push themselves as a privacy browser and use the headline "You are not a product" on their landing page.

I think it's mostly due to the locations of these services. KuCoin, Huobi, Binance, outside of the United States, whereas Brave is.

Fair enough, but as malevolent says, it's quite disappointing they have just taken the easiest route for themselves at the expense of their user base. As I said, there are plenty of exchanges and services which don't require KYC as long as you don't touch fiat. Brave could have been another one with a bit of work on their part. Instead they chose to compromise the privacy of some of their users.

[BitHodler]

As I said, there are plenty of exchanges and services which don't require KYC as long as you don't touch fiat. Brave could have been another one with a bit of work on their part. Instead they chose to compromise the privacy of some of their users.

For now there are still exchanges that don't require KYC, but it's going downhill where each week or month one announces that they no longer provide that type of service due to regulatory concerns.

What will happen is that the last standing non KYC exchanges will be shit exchanges such as Yobit. The logical path for other exchanges is to become compliant and cover the risk of potentially being penalized.

As for Brave, I have used it for a while just for the sake of trying it out, but outside the earning feature it doesn't provide much utility over what some other browsers/extensions offer. Won't lose a second sleep over this.

[o_e_l_e_o]

What will happen is that the last standing non KYC exchanges will be shit exchanges such as Yobit.

Or decentralized exchanges like Bisq, which do not require KYC because they do not touch your coins at any time. Furthermore, because of their decentralized structure, it is near impossible for a government to shut them down - it would be akin to them trying to shutdown bitcoin itself. I admit they have a large problem right now with low liquidity and poor speed of trades, but hopefully as they become more popular in the future both of these things will improve.

There will always be a place for exchanges with full KYC procedures, because there will always be a demand from day traders for near instant trading with high liquidity.

As for Brave, I have used it for a while just for the sake of trying it out, but outside the earning feature it doesn't provide much utility over what some other browsers/extensions offer.

Agreed. I used it for some things, but Firefox with the right settings and extensions is superior in terms of speed, security, and privacy.

Brave is a trusted company with a good reputation

I'm by no means saying Brave is a scam, but giving someone access to your documents just because they are a "trusted company" is a pretty slippery slope. Quadriga was a "trusted company", until they exit scammed with millions. Many people considered Bitconnect a "trust company", until they did the same. Hell, Charles Ponzi was "trusted" by many individuals. Every scam that has successfully scammed people out of their money or information was initially "trusted" by someone.

[Patatas]

lol I think crypto-related projects are evolving backward. Even google-chrome doesn't require you to do any KYC or that sort of thing to use the browser. You can always configure your cookie settings and make sure your data is protected. Good times with brave. Had to uninstall it after the update.

[genericlime]

Crypto projects are all trying to get regulated because retail consumers think regulated = safe. But that's not the case. Crypto is about taking back our freedom and privacy. Its a shame even DEXs like IDEX are doing KYC now.

[o_e_l_e_o]

Even google-chrome doesn't require you to do any KYC or that sort of thing to use the browser.

They don't need to. If you use Chrome, then Alphabet Inc. already have a complete log of everything you do online, every site you visit, every purchase you make, every communication you make. KYC is irrelevant to them when they know it all already.

You can always configure your cookie settings and make sure your data is protected.

You are completely fooling yourself if you think that changing settings from within Chrome will stop Chrome from spying on you and logging your data. The same is true for all Google products. Even when you explicitly tell Chrome or Google to stop spying on you, they keep doing it. All that changes is you don't get to see the "history" that they have stored on you anymore. https://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/americas/google-location-data-privacy-android-sundar-pichai-a8490636.html

[mk4]

Crypto projects are all trying to get regulated because retail consumers think regulated = safe. But that's not the case. Crypto is about taking back our freedom and privacy. Its a shame even DEXs like IDEX are doing KYC now.

It's just the simple fact that they're not decentralized, especially these "decentralized" exchanges. If they were actually decentralized, then the government wouldn't even be able to force anyone KYC because who would they send their warnings to in the first place? The fact that there's one company working on IDEX(Aurora Labs S.A.) working on it is enough evidence that it's nowhere decentralized.

[buwaytress]

Don't know if it's true or not but if so, then you already know immediately to stop using this browser. I hate to say it, but if they're going to implement this, then they should know foremost this is their reputation down the drain. Tells you all you need to know about these for-profit projects that pretend to want to support some crypto or cypherpunk ideal -- it all starts out with dreamy fantansies and ends with your wallet and govt ID plastered all over their screen.

Shame because I actually tried out Brave and it wasn't too shabby.

You really want privacy, stick to Bitcoin, and wait for the privacy upgrades to happen, meanwhile, mix and coinjoin.

[LTU_btc]

lol I think crypto-related projects are evolving backward. Even google-chrome doesn't require you to do any KYC or that sort of thing to use the browser.

Why Chrome would need KYC when Google already knows everything about us. If you're using Google products, cookies settings won't help you to hide from being spied. Google knows where you been yesterday or month ago, what are your interests and etc. It's much bigger thing thsn all these KYC.

[TryNinja]

lol I think crypto-related projects are evolving backward. Even google-chrome doesn't require you to do any KYC or that sort of thing to use the browser.

Why would they? What KYC has to do with using a browser? The only reason Brave is asking for KYC is because they deal with money and cryptocurrencies, and that's required just like any other exchange. Also, this comparison doesn't many any sense. Brave doesn't require KYC to use the browser, only to do some stuff with their BAT token.

You can always configure your cookie settings and make sure your data is protected. Good times with brave. Had to uninstall it after the update.

You clearly didn't do your research to see what is this about.

[malevolent]

Or decentralized exchanges like Bisq, which do not require KYC because they do not touch your coins at any time. Furthermore, because of their decentralized structure, it is near impossible for a government to shut them down - it would be akin to them trying to shutdown bitcoin itself. I admit they have a large problem right now with low liquidity and poor speed of trades, but hopefully as they become more popular in the future both of these things will improve.

Authorities in certain *cough* jurisdictions may still one day decide to pull tricks that anyone who contributes in any way to the development of Bisq or its infrastructure, i.e. seeing for example how Etherdelta's owner had to pay a big fine, can face responsibility.

Why Chrome would need KYC when Google already knows everything about us. If you're using Google products, cookies settings won't help you to hide from being spied. Google knows where you been yesterday or month ago, what are your interests and etc. It's much bigger thing thsn all these KYC.

Google probably knows its average user better than all their loved ones put together.

[pawanjain]

lol I think crypto-related projects are evolving backward. Even google-chrome doesn't require you to do any KYC or that sort of thing to use the browser. You can always configure your cookie settings and make sure your data is protected. Good times with brave. Had to uninstall it after the update.

LOL I think you must be a noob to think that your data is protected after using chrome. Once you use chrome, Google owns your shit.
There is nothing you can do except a few tweaks so that google can steal less data of yours but there is no turning back from it.
Google pretty much tracks everything about you if you keep using it.

May be google is tracking this thread right now since we have used the term 'Google' so often in this thread. Oh, there goes it one more time. 

[o_e_l_e_o]

Authorities in certain *cough* jurisdictions may still one day decide to pull tricks that anyone who contributes in any way to the development of Bisq or its infrastructure

True, but they could also one day do the same thing to bitcoin developers or even anyone they find mining or running a full node. Bitcoin of course wouldn't end or shutdown, it would be continued by people both fighting those laws and in the hundreds of other jurisdictions where those laws don't apply.

Google probably knows its average user better than all their loved ones put together.

I would say that's a certainty. Would you give your loved ones unrestricted access to your emails? Would you want your loved ones looking at your search or browsing history? Would you show them a complete history of everything you've ever bought online? Every site you've ever visited? Your location in real time, at all times? Would you want them knowing what kind of porn you watch? Google knows all this and more, if you use their products.

[bL4nkcode]

I'm using brave but never tried to withdraw those bat, and never make an account for uphold, so no, didn't hear this thing till now. Time to relocate I guess.

[BrewMaster]

Isn't his reputation in the tech industry already tarnished due to his political beliefs and activities? Asking for KYC won't ruin someone's reputation in the cryptocurrency space, at least not in 2019, but it definitely leaves a sour taste in the mouth, when they could have relocated to a friendlier jurisdiction.

i don't think there will ever be any problems with asking for KYC in cryptocurrency space. we all know and understand the centralized services are subjected to regulations.
the reputation is ruined when they start claiming to be decentralized (like decentralized exchanges that are centralized, eg. Binance DEX) or talk about privacy (like this case) and then their actions are the exact opposite of their claims.

[kovrita]

i just found out about it but apparently this has been the plan for some time now. it seems like it was first for publishers to gather BAT tokens and now it is to be enforcd for anybody who wants to use the wallet (Brave Rewards).
...

it is worth noting that KYC is not requires if you use it as a browser but the question rises, why would you want to use it after this and when there are good browsers like Firefox available which is the original code of this project?

This is where the whole industry seems to be going:
Corporation this, Venture Capital that..., KYC this, IRS Letters that...