Is KYC bad for crypto?

[Vishnu.Reang]

In my own personal opinion, KYC isn't bad for cryptocurrency because the only reason why a project requires a KYC to avoid multiple accounts and for them to trust their participants. The bad thing about KYCs is if a project is a fraud or scam because they can steal your informations and used in their illegal activities.

KYC involves sending the scanned copy of your passport (or some other important national ID document) to relatively unknown people. And in today's world, this is one of the riskiest things to do. If you are investing $10 or $20 in a project, will you be willing to take this risk? If the real intention is to prevent multiple applications from the same individual, then some other method such as telephone verification can be used.

[reality18]

KYC is not a bad initiative for the entire crypto space looking at the concept behind it. KYC helps project developers to know their customers as well as help them to know the rate of adoption of that project and its product/service. It is only fitting to let investors or bounty participants aware of the need to pass KYC at the beginning of the investment or bounty program in order not to raise any argument in the end.

[Firefoxx]

Kyc is not bad because of its function. Kyc helps secure accounts to avoid hackers and also helps to protect one should incase there's issue on exchange so as to claim ownership. Kyc does so many private functions and shouldn't be neglected. It's a privacy tool.

[Sembadapuja]

If the report for KYC does not affect all transaction activities maybe I will not give. because for me the identity must be properly protected because it is very dangerous to give to authorities that we don't know or may not even trust. It is bad for crypto if it will be use in shady transaction but if it will be use correctly then it will not that bad at all, let's just hope that every exchange will tighten their security so hackers cannot penetrate their databases.

[Slingshot]

To me I would say kyc isn't a bad idea in crypto but many are scared of doing kyc because of privacy as not everyone likes seeing his or her details being exposed outside and of an exchange gets hacked it will definitely affect kyc users as it has happened before with an exchange. But good of kyc is, it protects users account that's if the exchange is strong and it helps to resolve disoute, also helps to avoid outsider from hacking users details.

[Perfect35]

When projects started integrating KYC and making it mandatory for participants to comply, it was like a joke and gradually, others were also bringing in the idea and imbibing it. Had it been we ignored them, they would not have succeeded at it and others would not have conceived the idea. I think now, it has almost become and norm, which cannot be changed again. Most exchanges very soon will start mandating it for every one of their users.

[bbc.reporter]

KYC have advatanges and harm the user of the crypto, for the advatange of this once a a user do something bad he is possible to locate where they came from and who is he, but the bad effecrs of this a person who wants to be unknown will not anymore because they requiring KYC a user need to follow because if they don't they did not able to use their platforms for sure and another disadvatanges ofthat is once a system hack the details of customer possible to see of the hackers and use to the illegal activities and the user will be sacrifice in the future.

Yes that is the official reason why they say that every service should require KYC. However, the real reason is to monitor each person's movement. I reckon next would be to create an artificial intelligence algorithm to predict your every movement on the internet.

Also, do exchanges declare that they do not share or sell your personal documents to advertisers and other 3rd parties in their terms of service?

[Abiky]

Yes that is the official reason why they say that every service should require KYC. However, the real reason is to monitor each person's movement. I reckon next would be to create an artificial intelligence algorithm to predict your every movement on the internet.

Also, do exchanges declare that they do not share or sell your personal documents to advertisers and other 3rd parties in their terms of service?

I don't think exchanges will be able to protect your personal information from advertisers or other third parties. They could do anything once they notice suspicious activity on your account. Centralized exchanges could easily notify the authorities against any transaction (trade) they see suspicious performed on the exchange platform itself. In the case of advertisers, central exchanges wouldn't want to miss some "extra profit" so they wouldn't care more or less sharing your personal information with them. The mere fact that KYC poses a security risk to crypto users, has a lot to tell. I know that governments want to tackle illegal activities performed on centralized exchanges, but KYC is not the way to go. Maybe there's another way to do this? After all, your ID verification documents stored on centralized exchanges' servers could be easily exposed by a hacker. Instead of submitting personally identifiable documents, governments could require exchanges to biometrically scan your fingerprint or even iris to confirm your identity. I believe it's much safer to do this than sharing your ID documents to an exchange. With WebAuthn on the works, something like this could be made possible.

Anyhow, crypto users have a variety of options to choose from if they're skeptical about KYC. There are many alternatives to existent instant exchanges (like ShapeShift), which don't require KYC. The same way, there are many decentralized exchanges that don't require KYC and are a great alternative to popular centralized exchanges on the crypto space (like Binance and Bittrex). Additionally, you can trade crypto to Fiat or vice versa in a P2P manner (in-person). The real problem is that the newcomer into crypto is not aware of these workarounds, leading him/her to submit his/her ID verification documents on a centralized exchange. As long as governments are requiring KYC on centralized exchanges, there's nothing we can do to prevent malicious actors from stealing your identity. Just my opinion

[Japinat]

When projects started integrating KYC and making it mandatory for participants to comply, it was like a joke and gradually, others were also bringing in the idea and imbibing it. Had it been we ignored them, they would not have succeeded at it and others would not have conceived the idea. I think now, it has almost become and norm, which cannot be changed again. Most exchanges very soon will start mandating it for every one of their users.

you are seeing the best possibility that would happen in the long run, this market will soon be regulated by the authorities and they will impose the KYC regulation, and no one will be exempted. Some people say to to "p2p" if you want to avoid KYC but then again, trading in centralized exchanges are more convenient to majority of us so we will certainly still comply with the KYC.

[FontSeli]

In some cases regulations are necessary to put an end to fraud and corruption in the crypto/Blockchain industry. By requiring KYC compliance on centralized exchanges, the crypto world could become a better place. However, the mere fact that you'd need to provide some sort of ID verification would completely destroy the purpose of crypto. I've seen situations where centralized exchanges became hacked, putting customers' identities at risk. Last time I've heard, someone hacked Binance and threatened to expose customer's identities across the web.

This makes me to believe that KYC does more harm than good for crypto. Of course, regulation is necessary in order to legitimize the industry in its entirety. Institutional investors, conglomerates, and other entities will find crypto regulatory-compliant for their own needs. But knowing that KYC goes against crypto's principles, could make the entire industry similar to traditional banking.

What are your thoughts?

Most exchanges are located in offshore and other areas that are not subject to the laws of developed countries. This means that they can set their own rules and they do not obey anyone, but they require to pass the KYC. What for? This means that they transfer the data to someone else or use it for their own purposes.
Bitcoin was created in order to give anonymity in making payments between people, the increasing use of KYC undermines this idea.

In addition, passing the KYC is also dangerous because your data will be linked to your wallets and you can be tracked. Therefore, if you have the opportunity, it is better not to pass the KYC.

[Yamifoud]

KYC is not a big deal for when someone asking it provide that it is a good intention and I know who is asking that. But something it turns out that giving our KYC to another person especially in crypto isn't a good idea. Having some instances that scammers are using other personal identities just to continue their bad intention will make people not to submit KYC anymore. And I hope that newcomers will be aware of this and they will not become a victim.

[Mpamaegbu]

Don't do KYC on any new projects, it will be very risky!

This post here is laden with too much sense. Besides unscrupulous teams and their devs selling KYC documents for monetary exchange or scampering with it, KYC defeats the essence of anonymity which Bitcoin stands for. However, I think what makes people indulge in KYC projects is either their belief that the project will give them a good ROI or they're deceived/tricked into such. We see this latter scenario in bounties. I have been a victim of this where teams change the rule and asked for KYC at the end of bounty as part of the condition for distribution. This is really sad and unfortunate.

[Rengga Jati]

they can set their own rules and they do not obey anyone, but they require to pass the KYC. What for?

Yes, it isn't fair that the members need to pass KYC while the exchange itself is suspected to not obey any rules. In this case, I think it is better to avoid joining the exchange. It seems the best solution. But for the exchange which is clearly located in a well-known region having legal rules, it can be understandable if we pass KYC there. So, the point is on the status of the exchange itself. If it is trusted, requiring KYC is acceptable (more secure, even if no guarantee for our data). DWYOR 

[Botnake]

KYC is not a big deal for when someone asking it provide that it is a good intention and I know who is asking that. But something it turns out that giving our KYC to another person especially in crypto isn't a good idea. Having some instances that scammers are using other personal identities just to continue their bad intention will make people not to submit KYC anymore. And I hope that newcomers will be aware of this and they will not become a victim.

When you trust the platform, you are not afraid to complying with their KYC requirement, unfortunately majority of the projects in the altcoins market are scams, so most likely we will be scam too. Some projects looks really legit in the beginning but in the long run their true colors will be revealed so we still have to be careful as our information is very valuable to us.

[CETAN.IO]

for me, so identity verification is a standard procedure, the question is that there are now many ways to verify this

[Polar91]

In some cases regulations are necessary to put an end to fraud and corruption in the crypto/Blockchain industry. By requiring KYC compliance on centralized exchanges, the crypto world could become a better place. However, the mere fact that you'd need to provide some sort of ID verification would completely destroy the purpose of crypto. I've seen situations where centralized exchanges became hacked, putting customers' identities at risk. Last time I've heard, someone hacked Binance and threatened to expose customer's identities across the web.

What are your thoughts?

Actually, KYC distrupts user's privacy which makes them prone from identity theft. I'm personally not favorable of KYC but I have to comply as I understand why they are requiring it. In submitting KYC, it's vital to be picky. Submit your KYC only to huge companies thus the possibility of being prone to identity theft is lesser though the risk is still there. I think without KYC abusers will just abuse crypto which isn't good overall.

[DevilSlayer]

It is not bad for crypto but it is bad for the investors and participants.  I do not like kyc because my identity will be at risks. What do I say?  There is a recent thread here in the forum that saying that KYC in different projects and exchanhes are selling in the black market. It is too bad for me if someone use my identity and there is possibility that I can be accountable for what will he do because it is my name.

[bbc.reporter]

Yes that is the official reason why they say that every service should require KYC. However, the real reason is to monitor each person's movement. I reckon next would be to create an artificial intelligence algorithm to predict your every movement on the internet.

Also, do exchanges declare that they do not share or sell your personal documents to advertisers and other 3rd parties in their terms of service?

I don't think exchanges will be able to protect your personal information from advertisers or other third parties. They could do anything once they notice suspicious activity on your account. Centralized exchanges could easily notify the authorities against any transaction (trade) they see suspicious performed on the exchange platform itself. In the case of advertisers, central exchanges wouldn't want to miss some "extra profit" so they wouldn't care more or less sharing your personal information with them. The mere fact that KYC poses a security risk to crypto users, has a lot to tell. I know that governments want to tackle illegal activities performed on centralized exchanges, but KYC is not the way to go. Maybe there's another way to do this? After all, your ID verification documents stored on centralized exchanges' servers could be easily exposed by a hacker. Instead of submitting personally identifiable documents, governments could require exchanges to biometrically scan your fingerprint or even iris to confirm your identity. I believe it's much safer to do this than sharing your ID documents to an exchange. With WebAuthn on the works, something like this could be made possible.

Anyhow, crypto users have a variety of options to choose from if they're skeptical about KYC. There are many alternatives to existent instant exchanges (like ShapeShift), which don't require KYC. The same way, there are many decentralized exchanges that don't require KYC and are a great alternative to popular centralized exchanges on the crypto space (like Binance and Bittrex). Additionally, you can trade crypto to Fiat or vice versa in a P2P manner (in-person). The real problem is that the newcomer into crypto is not aware of these workarounds, leading him/her to submit his/her ID verification documents on a centralized exchange. As long as governments are requiring KYC on centralized exchanges, there's nothing we can do to prevent malicious actors from stealing your identity. Just my opinion

Agreed! These people who accept KYC as a standard procedure assume that giving their personal privacy is acceptable in exchange for security. They were scammed. They always end with neither hehehehe.

[TemTum]

Kyc is needed

Crypto will never go mainstream without it as to go mainstream you need regulation

[sulendra12]

It's okay I think since if you guys made any social media account and then you already agree that they can collect your information for their own needs. But, it defeats the purpose of crypto where the anonymity is a main thing on crypto.

For people whose already joining crypto for a long time, they won't share their data even for the closest friends because they don't want people to actually know who are they. It's just up to you to actually describe what is good for crypto or not.