Roobet.com | Crypto’s Fastest Growing Casino 🦘

[danadc]

I doubt that it would be that easy to get others documents. Sure if you are in Colombia or something and people are starving, offering a few dollars to them would make their life easier and that would be a lot better for them, it’s really easy to understand what it would look like.

But, if we are talking about something that is dangerously risky for the people who do it, like literally getting caught levels? Then it would put them in danger and people who are doing that type of illegal stuff wouldn't want to be in there. Even giving others documents would cause them to get caught if that person speaks, and you may feel at ease for 1000 of them not, but one of them could eventually and that’s a risk.

If you know this business you would easily know that people from the third world countries jump into this KYC documents selling for few dollars only and forging the document is another way of fulfilling KYC requirements.So getting documents is hard directly from person but they go through these different ways to obtain the documents and should be avoided at any cost because it has many problems if you get caught.

People in third world countries don't understand the importance of KYC. It is true that they can sell their documents for few dollars. They just fell that they have nothing to lose, there is no problem if their KYC documents are stolen. But with the change of era advance technology is used everywhere. when it comes to KYC many platforms ask for their live video of a few seconds so identifying real person is very easy at the moment.

I'm from a third world country but I think generalizing all people that lives in third world country is wrong, I believe that security matters and selling your own documents for just couple of bucks is an ignorant move. Identity theft is a widely done and there is a market for it! Deepfake is one of those technology that can be used on these crimes, I wonder if someone passed KYC by using deepfake or photoshopping an ID.

We agree that things are like that in the third world, but also how a woman who lives in a third world country knows that many times having documents and all the data of a person, well, not much can be done, even though things can be more dangerous in these parts of the world, I have seen that there are people in Ecuador who sell credit cards with all the person's data and with their cards with money ready to be used, but they still cannot buy , because for a credit card they need approval by phone from the owner and none will be so stupid as to accept, the first thing they will do is block the card, but that's how I've seen things here.

[aysg76]

I believe most crypto-related project that requires KYC from their user partnership with private companies which are good in the business online data activities to take care of the KYC aspect.
But for data selection, I don't think that will happen because the possibility of KYC is to know a certain user and to be held responsible if done something against the law.

There is risk of storing the data with any third party because they are always at the risk of hacks and if you have noticed that many times employees id are being compromised and hackers have access to users data in these private companies so you are totally vulnerable in these matters from security points of view.So share with legit sources only.

[vv181]

I believe most crypto-related project that requires KYC from their user partnership with private companies which are good in the business online data activities to take care of the KYC aspect.
But for data selection, I don't think that will happen because the possibility of KYC is to know a certain user and to be held responsible if done something against the law.

There is risk of storing the data with any third party because they are always at the risk of hacks and if you have noticed that many times employees id are being compromised and hackers have access to users data in these private companies so you are totally vulnerable in these matters from security points of view.~

Crypto-related project using a vendor for their KYC/AML management is indeed beneficial. There might be too much overhead if one company handles and develop a lot of sensitive materials all at once and on its own premises. I rather think it is way safer in the security aspect noting the main company does not control too much sensitive data and let the KYC vendor do its job.

It does not fully prevent and guarantee there won't be any breach but it is way more manageable if the critical aspect of the business is managed by the vendor who specializes in the subject. As we might have noticed, Roobet does also use Veriff for verification.

[Apocollapse]

Roobet launched a new event on their twitter, it's PowerUP Roulette $5,000 Cash drops, here's the requirement if anyone want to participate on the event. I think it's worth to try since you only need to spend $0.50 in order to get possible $100, if you're lucky enough, you might make profit without winning the event.

With every $0.50 bet on Pragmatic Play’s PowerUP Roulette, you have a chance to earn a random Cash Drop.
Play for a piece of the $5,000 prize pool and get one of ten $100 daily drops from October 4th at 18:01 EST until October 9th at 17:59 EST.

[Slow death]

I doubt that it would be that easy to get others documents. Sure if you are in Colombia or something and people are starving, offering a few dollars to them would make their life easier and that would be a lot better for them, it’s really easy to understand what it would look like.

But, if we are talking about something that is dangerously risky for the people who do it, like literally getting caught levels? Then it would put them in danger and people who are doing that type of illegal stuff wouldn't want to be in there. Even giving others documents would cause them to get caught if that person speaks, and you may feel at ease for 1000 of them not, but one of them could eventually and that’s a risk.

If you know this business you would easily know that people from the third world countries jump into this KYC documents selling for few dollars only and forging the document is another way of fulfilling KYC requirements.So getting documents is hard directly from person but they go through these different ways to obtain the documents and should be avoided at any cost because it has many problems if you get caught.

People in third world countries don't understand the importance of KYC. It is true that they can sell their documents for few dollars. They just fell that they have nothing to lose, there is no problem if their KYC documents are stolen. But with the change of era advance technology is used everywhere. when it comes to KYC many platforms ask for their live video of a few seconds so identifying real person is very easy at the moment.

my country for example is a 3rd world country and in my country to handle 90% of things it is necessary to do KYC and the people here are very careful with documents, that is, they would not do KYC in anonymous and unreliable places, and I doubt that I would accept to sell their documents because they know that they can be arrested for doing so, as the person who buys documents in most cases buys with the intention of committing crimes, so I think they should not think that they are all third world countries that people do not value their documents to the point of selling their documents

[suzanne5223]

I believe most crypto-related project that requires KYC from their user partnership with private companies which are good in the business online data activities to take care of the KYC aspect.
But for data selection, I don't think that will happen because the possibility of KYC is to know a certain user and to be held responsible if done something against the law.

There is risk of storing the data with any third party because they are always at the risk of hacks and if you have noticed that many times employees id are being compromised and hackers have access to users data in these private companies so you are totally vulnerable in these matters from security points of view.~

Crypto-related project using a vendor for their KYC/AML management is indeed beneficial. There might be too much overhead if one company handles and develop a lot of sensitive materials all at once and on its own premises. I rather think it is way safer in the security aspect noting the main company does not control too much sensitive data and let the KYC vendor do its job.

It does not fully prevent and guarantee there won't be any breach but it is way more manageable if the critical aspect of the business is managed by the vendor who specializes in the subject. As we might have noticed, Roobet does also use Veriff for verification.

@vv181, This is my own impression but aysg76 seems not to understand the concept of crypto-related companies having a vendor who specializes in KYC/AML activities to handle to KYC activities of their customer because the main purpose was to provide security of the use data not to cause vulnerability because the duties will be broad for the crypto company alone to handle. Besides, we're talking about KYC/AML vendors that are licensed by the government.

[babygun]

Roobet launched a new event on their twitter, it's PowerUP Roulette $5,000 Cash drops, here's the requirement if anyone want to participate on the event. I think it's worth to try since you only need to spend $0.50 in order to get possible $100, if you're lucky enough, you might make profit without winning the event.

With every $0.50 bet on Pragmatic Play’s PowerUP Roulette, you have a chance to earn a random Cash Drop.
Play for a piece of the $5,000 prize pool and get one of ten $100 daily drops from October 4th at 18:01 EST until October 9th at 17:59 EST.

I don't think thats ever worth it but I guess it all depends on luck. Roobet has a lot of active players so your chance of winning is low and the minimum bet of 0.5$ is too high for me (my bankroll would be depleted way too quickly if play these kind of bets).

[aysg76]

@vv181, This is my own impression but aysg76 seems not to understand the concept of crypto-related companies having a vendor who specializes in KYC/AML activities to handle to KYC activities of their customer because the main purpose was to provide security of the use data not to cause vulnerability because the duties will be broad for the crypto company alone to handle. Besides, we're talking about KYC/AML vendors that are licensed by the government.

See I clearly understood the point but it seems you have ignored what I was trying to say that if you submit your information or documents with any of the casino you find on the market they might hand out your sensitive information to these companies on dark web so go with trusted one's only.

Second point about third party software was that there is always risk of hacks if you have seen mailchimp data leak few months back due to employee id compromised and there is risk in that also not saying crypto casino should alone handle all the things.So read my post again man.This is general concern about security.

[Haunebu]

Second point about third party software was that there is always risk of hacks if you have seen mailchimp data leak few months back due to employee id compromised and there is risk in that also not saying crypto casino should alone handle all the things.So read my post again man.This is general concern about security.

I agree with your opinion here. It's good to see Roobet utilising the services of top quality security company/companies, but this in no way guarantees 100% security for user data.

Way bigger companies like Rockstar Games suffered a security breach recently which screwed them royally despite employing some of the best security advisors in the world.

I advise providing limited KYC only when absolutely necessary to extremely reliable sites like Roobet, Stake etc.

[suzanne5223]

@vv181, This is my own impression but aysg76 seems not to understand the concept of crypto-related companies having a vendor who specializes in KYC/AML activities to handle to KYC activities of their customer because the main purpose was to provide security of the use data not to cause vulnerability because the duties will be broad for the crypto company alone to handle. Besides, we're talking about KYC/AML vendors that are licensed by the government.

See I clearly understood the point but it seems you have ignored what I was trying to say that if you submit your information or documents with any of the casino you find on the market they might hand out your sensitive information to these companies on dark web so go with trusted one's only.

Oh ok. But every casino has certain Tos they use when it comes to the private information of their users and this is the reason it's very important to only provide private information to reputable and trusted casinos.

Second point about third party software was that there is always risk of hacks if you have seen mailchimp data leak few months back due to employee id compromised and there is risk in that also not saying crypto casino should alone handle all the things.So read my post again man.This is general concern about security.

It is understandable that nothing is forever safe especially when it has to do with online activities but I am talking about KYC/AML that works with the government. Technically, they don't have the user document and what they do is check if the document and name provider is correct with the information on the government database an example is Sumsub.

[l3pox]

KYC is very important because it is the key to their authenticity, the subject is complicated, but both sides must be understood.

That's tough. Majority of the gamblers including me will continue hating on KYC due to various reasons which is why it's very, very difficult for both sides of the KYC debate to reach a mutual consensus.

I'd say bear market will make them get benefit since gamblers will try to gamble more in order to get profit from bear market and the fees is much lower due to the network aren't busy.

That makes zero sense. Gamblers will try to gamble less due to the bear market which will directly cause these gambling sites to earn less in the short-term.

yes, like many cat and mouse games this will be a never ending debate with the probable outcome of KYC policies getting more and more restrict over time, and possible some decentralized alternatives appearing here and there

[FanEagle]

Crypto-related project using a vendor for their KYC/AML management is indeed beneficial. There might be too much overhead if one company handles and develop a lot of sensitive materials all at once and on its own premises. I rather think it is way safer in the security aspect noting the main company does not control too much sensitive data and let the KYC vendor do its job.

It does not fully prevent and guarantee there won't be any breach but it is way more manageable if the critical aspect of the business is managed by the vendor who specializes in the subject. As we might have noticed, Roobet does also use Veriff for verification.

@vv181, This is my own impression but aysg76 seems not to understand the concept of crypto-related companies having a vendor who specializes in KYC/AML activities to handle to KYC activities of their customer because the main purpose was to provide security of the use data not to cause vulnerability because the duties will be broad for the crypto company alone to handle. Besides, we're talking about KYC/AML vendors that are licensed by the government.

Those type of companies are there basically for just security reasons and not because of hard work. Collecting KYC and keeping them secure is not that much of extra work and any casino could do that, just put it on some offline server where nobody can hack, and you will be fine, there is absolutely no trouble at all.

It is done because of governmental pressure, if you use KYC company supported by the government, then you could legally be a casino without a trouble and would be able to say "we worked with the government on this" and get away with it, plus you could tell the gamblers "we do not hold any of your information" which is good for marketing.

[Fatunad]

KYC is very important because it is the key to their authenticity, the subject is complicated, but both sides must be understood.

That's tough. Majority of the gamblers including me will continue hating on KYC due to various reasons which is why it's very, very difficult for both sides of the KYC debate to reach a mutual consensus.

I'd say bear market will make them get benefit since gamblers will try to gamble more in order to get profit from bear market and the fees is much lower due to the network aren't busy.

That makes zero sense. Gamblers will try to gamble less due to the bear market which will directly cause these gambling sites to earn less in the short-term.

yes, like many cat and mouse games this will be a never ending debate with the probable outcome of KYC policies getting more and more restrict over time, and possible some decentralized alternatives appearing here and there

Whether we do like it or not, there's no other path we would really be seeing or taking but to have those KYC sooner or on later years, considering that regulation and laws becomes even more tighter as the years passing.Good thing we do have here is that we do still have options which other platforms would really be taking the place into those who had fallen into that KYC set-up.
We've seen that there are still lots of platforms or companies that doesnt apply that KYC this is why we do still have choice or option to take.
I do agree that this is really indeed a never ending debate or talks about KYC.

[serjent05]

Crypto-related project using a vendor for their KYC/AML management is indeed beneficial. There might be too much overhead if one company handles and develop a lot of sensitive materials all at once and on its own premises. I rather think it is way safer in the security aspect noting the main company does not control too much sensitive data and let the KYC vendor do its job.

It does not fully prevent and guarantee there won't be any breach but it is way more manageable if the critical aspect of the business is managed by the vendor who specializes in the subject. As we might have noticed, Roobet does also use Veriff for verification.

@vv181, This is my own impression but aysg76 seems not to understand the concept of crypto-related companies having a vendor who specializes in KYC/AML activities to handle to KYC activities of their customer because the main purpose was to provide security of the use data not to cause vulnerability because the duties will be broad for the crypto company alone to handle. Besides, we're talking about KYC/AML vendors that are licensed by the government.

Those type of companies are there basically for just security reasons and not because of hard work. Collecting KYC and keeping them secure is not that much of extra work and any casino could do that, just put it on some offline server where nobody can hack, and you will be fine, there is absolutely no trouble at all.

I think Casino use a third party company in verifying KYC entries so it is an expenditure for the Casino.  It isn't a hardwork yes, but it is an expense that eats away Casino profit.  So I think casinos will be the first one to not wanting to implement KYC because it affects their profit somehow but then due to the requirement of the authorities they are forced to implement it.

It is done because of governmental pressure, if you use KYC company supported by the government, then you could legally be a casino without a trouble and would be able to say "we worked with the government on this" and get away with it, plus you could tell the gamblers "we do not hold any of your information" which is good for marketing.

True I also agree that casinos are forced to implement KYC due to AML.  Anyway, that is a clever way of advertising and promoting KYC 

[vv181]

Crypto-related project using a vendor for their KYC/AML management is indeed beneficial. There might be too much overhead if one company handles and develop a lot of sensitive materials all at once and on its own premises. I rather think it is way safer in the security aspect noting the main company does not control too much sensitive data and let the KYC vendor do its job.

It does not fully prevent and guarantee there won't be any breach but it is way more manageable if the critical aspect of the business is managed by the vendor who specializes in the subject. As we might have noticed, Roobet does also use Veriff for verification.

@vv181, This is my own impression but aysg76 seems not to understand the concept of crypto-related companies having a vendor who specializes in KYC/AML activities to handle to KYC activities of their customer because the main purpose was to provide security of the use data not to cause vulnerability because the duties will be broad for the crypto company alone to handle. Besides, we're talking about KYC/AML vendors that are licensed by the government.

Those type of companies are there basically for just security reasons and not because of hard work. Collecting KYC and keeping them secure is not that much of extra work and any casino could do that, just put it on some offline server where nobody can hack, and you will be fine, there is absolutely no trouble at all.

If we come back to the company choices whether they are willing to take an overhead cost for managing the data or outsourcing it. Do note that, KYC/AML management doesn't solely imply a simple thing like verifying whether the user is legitimate and matches the provided documents. There are many levels within this subject like fraud analysis and checking if one identity is not part of some blacklist or something. And it requires data whereas some companies who specialized in that kind of subject already have.

Let's check a third-party platform that Roobet use, Veriff and Seon. If you are going to their website, you can clearly see that they are solving many problems that are worth outsourcing if some companies are dealing with fraud or identity business requirements.

[suzanne5223]

Crypto-related project using a vendor for their KYC/AML management is indeed beneficial. There might be too much overhead if one company handles and develop a lot of sensitive materials all at once and on its own premises. I rather think it is way safer in the security aspect noting the main company does not control too much sensitive data and let the KYC vendor do its job.

It does not fully prevent and guarantee there won't be any breach but it is way more manageable if the critical aspect of the business is managed by the vendor who specializes in the subject. As we might have noticed, Roobet does also use Veriff for verification.

@vv181, This is my own impression but aysg76 seems not to understand the concept of crypto-related companies having a vendor who specializes in KYC/AML activities to handle to KYC activities of their customer because the main purpose was to provide security of the use data not to cause vulnerability because the duties will be broad for the crypto company alone to handle. Besides, we're talking about KYC/AML vendors that are licensed by the government.

Those type of companies are there basically for just security reasons and not because of hard work. Collecting KYC and keeping them secure is not that much of extra work and any casino could do that, just put it on some offline server where nobody can hack, and you will be fine, there is absolutely no trouble at all.

I think Casino use a third party company in verifying KYC entries so it is an expenditure for the Casino.  It isn't a hardwork yes, but it is an expense that eats away Casino profit.  So I think casinos will be the first one to not wanting to implement KYC because it affects their profit somehow but then due to the requirement of the authorities they are forced to implement it.

I'm glad to see someone that understands that if the casino considers the expense of the company verifying the user's KYC, keeping the data offline, or hiring a governmental third-party company they won't like to implement KYC but they are doing it just to make friend with the Feds and to keep their business going.
@FanEagle Keeping information on some offline server also have con and pro. I don't consider it easy as you said and the casino cannot handle the in-depth criminal search but their user so using a third party that specialized in the field is the best option.

Crypto-related project using a vendor for their KYC/AML management is indeed beneficial. There might be too much overhead if one company handles and develop a lot of sensitive materials all at once and on its own premises. I rather think it is way safer in the security aspect noting the main company does not control too much sensitive data and let the KYC vendor do its job.

It does not fully prevent and guarantee there won't be any breach but it is way more manageable if the critical aspect of the business is managed by the vendor who specializes in the subject. As we might have noticed, Roobet does also use Veriff for verification.

@vv181, This is my own impression but aysg76 seems not to understand the concept of crypto-related companies having a vendor who specializes in KYC/AML activities to handle to KYC activities of their customer because the main purpose was to provide security of the use data not to cause vulnerability because the duties will be broad for the crypto company alone to handle. Besides, we're talking about KYC/AML vendors that are licensed by the government.

Those type of companies are there basically for just security reasons and not because of hard work. Collecting KYC and keeping them secure is not that much of extra work and any casino could do that, just put it on some offline server where nobody can hack, and you will be fine, there is absolutely no trouble at all.

Let's check a third-party platform that Roobet use, Veriff and Seon. If you are going to their website, you can clearly see that they are solving many problems that are worth outsourcing if some companies are dealing with fraud or identity business requirements.

These are some of the reasons why I believe the third party that works with the government is the best option.

[vv181]

~
Those type of companies are there basically for just security reasons and not because of hard work. Collecting KYC and keeping them secure is not that much of extra work and any casino could do that, just put it on some offline server where nobody can hack, and you will be fine, there is absolutely no trouble at all.

Let's check a third-party platform that Roobet use, Veriff and Seon. If you are going to their website, you can clearly see that they are solving many problems that are worth outsourcing if some companies are dealing with fraud or identity business requirements.

These are some of the reasons why I believe the third party that works with the government is the best option.

That is not my point rather that kind of platform exists, of course, because there is a demand, but it is as an act of preventive measure in the business that Roobet deals with. They try to minimize having an issue with government or authority, so it is a prerequisite to follow what regulation suggests, and the way to achieve that is to integrate such kind of platform.

It is not merely that those platforms are in touch directly with governments, but it just simply a sector that a business needs based on what the regulation suggests.

[tranthidung]

That is not my point rather that kind of platform exists, of course, because there is a demand, but it is as an act of preventive measure in the business that Roobet deals with. They try to minimize having an issue with government or authority, so it is a prerequisite to follow what regulation suggests, and the way to achieve that is to integrate such kind of platform.

No platform wants to have issues with governments nowadays when regulations in cryptocurrency industry have become stricter and stricter.

If they can obey regulations, locally and regionally as well as globally, they would like to do this as best as possible. It will be good for their reputation that is helpful to maintain current customer base and expand to potential ones.

It also is helpful to prevent unnecessary harmful fud against their platform.

In order to have full transparent and touch customer hearts, they should write all things clearly and transparently then publish it publicly for community including customers to explore if they have time and interest in reading for their own sake benefit.

Frankly Roobet.com is well with their Term of Services, no shady writings as far as I know.

[suzanne5223]

~
Those type of companies are there basically for just security reasons and not because of hard work. Collecting KYC and keeping them secure is not that much of extra work and any casino could do that, just put it on some offline server where nobody can hack, and you will be fine, there is absolutely no trouble at all.

Let's check a third-party platform that Roobet use, Veriff and Seon. If you are going to their website, you can clearly see that they are solving many problems that are worth outsourcing if some companies are dealing with fraud or identity business requirements.

These are some of the reasons why I believe the third party that works with the government is the best option.

That is not my point rather that kind of platform exists, of course, because there is a demand, but it is as an act of preventive measure in the business that Roobet deals with. They try to minimize having an issue with government or authority, so it is a prerequisite to follow what regulation suggests, and the way to achieve that is to integrate such kind of platform.

It is not merely that those platforms are in touch directly with governments, but it just simply a sector that a business needs based on what the regulation suggests.

I understand your point but when I said third-party verification system that works with the government I was referring to the sector that verifies clients KYC information using the government databases and if you look closely all these third-party companies don't work directly with the government they are a private organization but work according to government rules.

[wiss19]

If we come back to the company choices whether they are willing to take an overhead cost for managing the data or outsourcing it. Do note that, KYC/AML management doesn't solely imply a simple thing like verifying whether the user is legitimate and matches the provided documents. There are many levels within this subject like fraud analysis and checking if one identity is not part of some blacklist or something. And it requires data whereas some companies who specialized in that kind of subject already have.

Let's check a third-party platform that Roobet use, Veriff and Seon. If you are going to their website, you can clearly see that they are solving many problems that are worth outsourcing if some companies are dealing with fraud or identity business requirements.

I understand that it takes time, but you could literally just hire one or two people for that job and be done with it and roobet is a multi-million dollar company that keeps on giving away a lot of stuff to the gamblers as well. Meaning they can definitely afford to hire some people, hell hire a dozen people if they want to, sure that would be useless cost but they can afford it at least it looks like that.

This is why I am not entirely sure the reason would be the hard work it would put. I feel like it is just to make sure that they separate the KYC to another company, for "just in case" reasons, it is adding a layer of security and that’s better.