Blockchain.com Wallet KYC

[fzkto]

Yes, they promised a certain amount of BTC if you verify with them. Moreover, there used to be several levels of verification, the highest I think was gold, for which you had to get some stellar coins or something like that. And it's one of the oldest and most famous wallets. Even I had my first exposure to bitcoin through blockchain.com. Soon the privacy of cryptocurrency will be completely forgotten! I wouldn't trust anyone with my ID!

[1715118498]

1715118498

[1715118498]

1715118498

[1715118498]

1715118498

[hosseinimr93]

Based on what OP said, it looks like he was referring to the old era Blockchain.info wallet, which never gave one any back up phrase or seed phrase  that they could use to restore an account... Correct me if am wrong.

There was no BIP39 seed phrase in the wallets created before the upgrade they did in 2016. But users had full control over their fund.
As far as I know, in the old wallets, users had a json file which could be used for recovering all private keys if they knew the encryption password.

Again, I am not saying blockchcain.com wallet is secure. It's possible that they have access to the keys. It's also a buggy wallet with an unresponsive support.

[Kakmakr]

It might have been KYC free for many years.. but the large investors from Wall Street has changed it's original goals to be pseudo anonymous. Blockchain.com are now backed by renowned investors from Silicon Valley, Wall Street, and London.   See : https://www.blockchain.com/about  (Venture capitalist has funded $537M of equity, valued at $5.2B)

They also added the "Exchange" part now... and NO exchange can operate without the KYC requirements. They pulled the same shit as what "Circle" did.. back in the day. They pull you in with promises of pseudo anonymity to build a huge user base and then once they get that huge user base, they change the business model to a "Bank"  

Blockchain.com, Inc. are registered Money Services Businesses in the United States. https://www.blockchain.com/legal/law

[o_e_l_e_o]

It might have been KYC free for many years.. but the large investors from Wall Street has changed it's original goals to be pseudo anonymous. Blockchain.com are now backed by renowned investors from Silicon Valley, Wall Street, and London.   See : https://www.blockchain.com/about  (Venture capitalist has funded $537M of equity, valued at $5.2B)

It might have been KYC free, but it was never private or anonymous. They quite clearly have access to all your addresses and transactions, and link all that in to your email address, IP addresses, device identifiers, browser fingerprint, geolocation, and so on. You have absolutely zero privacy if you use blockchain.com.

Also, imagine having a few hundred million dollars to invest and choosing to invest in literally the worse service in the whole of bitcoin. How embarrassing.

They pull you in with promises of pseudo anonymity to build a huge user base and then once they get that huge user base, they change the business model to a "Bank"  

Bank and data broker. Their Privacy Policy gives them scope to not only share your data with third parties, but also to allow third parties to use their website to collect your data directly.

[Ultegra134]

Excuse me for not responding the past two days, my schedule was a mess and wasn't available.

Okay, back to the subject now, Blockchain.info was the first wallet I ever created, back then, you could only access your wallet via its unique ID, and if I'm not mistaken, if it was lost it couldn't be recovered. This has changed now, you can now access your wallet using your email address, while it records way more data than it used to.

On top of that, it also functions like an exchange, things have severely changed, and I'm curious if we're about to see some further centralization and an effort to contain cryptocurrencies.

P.S It also sends me a newsletter to my email on a daily basis.

[hosseinimr93]

you could only access your wallet via its unique ID, and if I'm not mistaken, if it was lost it couldn't be recovered.

As far as I know, old users had a "wallet.aes.json" file which could be used for recovering all the private keys.

This has changed now, you can now access your wallet using your email address, while it records way more data than it used to.

The other important change is that, they give users a BIP39 seed phrase which can be used for recovering the wallet without any need to their service.

P.S It also sends me a newsletter to my email on a daily basis.

Are you sure that you receive the emails from blockchain.com and they are not phishing emails?
I also have a wallet on blockchain.com. But I never receive email from them.

[suzanne5223]

Back in 2012-2013, I had a few Blockchain.com wallets, back then, no details were asked, there wasn't even an option to login via email. Recently, I received an email from them about a promotion. They were offering $5 in BTC, if you completed the KYC process, by providing your personal details, such as residence, uploading your driver's license, or other form of identification.

On top of that, they've now added a section about taxation of cryptocurrencies, providing you with the ability to export tax statements.

I think you're just aware of this Blockchain.com wallet improvement because you didn't check the email account you used to register your account or login into your account because this movement started some years ago and if i could remember, it started when they did their first airdrop but the crypto tax calculation will be added last year.
 

I'm starting to believe that even wallet providers and exchanges are shifting towards a centralization of cryptocurrencies, debunking previous theories about anonymity of funds and personal freedom.

What are your thoughts about this? Do you think more and more services will adopt similar techniques?

I believe this is the price we have to pay for cryptocurrency to be mainstream and in the future, more DEX will adopt the same techniques especially not that the Russian government is planning the escape the US, EU, etc sanctions.

[Ale88]

What are your thoughts about this? Do you think more and more services will adopt similar techniques?

It's possible that some wallets in the future will require a KYC process. Anyway talking about Blockchain.com, just stay away from that exchange/wallet, I've read so many stories of people who found their wallet locked for "security reasons" and despite all the documentation they sent, they wouldn't unlock the wallet. I wouldn't put any satoshi there, and for sure I wouldn't give them my personal details.

[Ultegra134]

Okay, for anyone who might be interested, I did actually fill up my details, in an attempt to receive the bonus they were offering. After approximately 2 weeks, the $5 bonus was credited into my account. Was it worth it? Meh, if you're planning to use the service, I don't see why not. They didn't ask for too many details, all the exchanges I'm using already have them, so it's not that big of a deal.

[Charles-Tim]

Anyway talking about Blockchain.com, just stay away from that exchange/wallet, I've read so many stories of people who found their wallet locked for "security reasons" and despite all the documentation they sent, they wouldn't unlock the wallet. I wouldn't put any satoshi there, and for sure I wouldn't give them my personal details.

Aside this, blockchain.com wallet is not recommendable at all, there are many complaints of people that will have funds but the wallet will indicate they have no fund. If the seed phrase is imported on a reputed wallet like Electrum, the coins would be recovered. One of the reasons not to use the wallet even at all.

Okay, for anyone who might be interested, I did actually fill up my details, in an attempt to receive the bonus they were offering. After approximately 2 weeks, the $5 bonus was credited into my account. Was it worth it? Meh, if you're planning to use the service, I don't see why not. They didn't ask for too many details, all the exchanges I'm using already have them, so it's not that big of a deal.

They did not ask for to much details? I do not think you are right. Was identity not asked for? What could be more detailed than that. You gave out your identity just for $5, that is surprising though when your data is worth more than that but most people do not know that. Although, you have indicated already that you have the data on exchanges before. But there is nothing bad to let people that are novice about how KYC is extremely dangerous to let them know the negative aspect of giving centralized service providers KYC.

[Ultegra134]

Okay, for anyone who might be interested, I did actually fill up my details, in an attempt to receive the bonus they were offering. After approximately 2 weeks, the $5 bonus was credited into my account. Was it worth it? Meh, if you're planning to use the service, I don't see why not. They didn't ask for too many details, all the exchanges I'm using already have them, so it's not that big of a deal.

They did not ask for to much details? I do not think you are right. Was identity not asked for? What could be more detailed than that. You gave out your identity just for $5, that is surprising though when your data is worth more than that but most people do not know that. Although, you have indicated already that you have the data on exchanges before. But there is nothing bad to let people that are novice about how KYC is extremely dangerous to let them know the negative aspect of giving centralized service providers KYC.

Aren't you using exchanges, such as Binance or Bitstamp? All exchanges now ask for identity verification, whether we like it or not, we'll have to face it. I highly doubt that it's feasible to avoid such identification for long. All major exchanges ask for it, unless you're up to decentralised finance and use exchanges such as Pancakeswap.

I don't have much to hide, nor am I hiding huge amounts of Bitcoin that I'd rather not declare, it's an inevitable process.

[o_e_l_e_o]

Aren't you using exchanges, such as Binance or Bitstamp?

Nope. Bisq and LocalCryptos instead.

All exchanges now ask for identity verification, whether we like it or not, we'll have to face it.

All centralized exchanges.

I highly doubt that it's feasible to avoid such identification for long.

I've been avoiding it for years, and I plan to continue doing so.

I don't have much to hide, nor am I hiding huge amounts of Bitcoin that I'd rather not declare, it's an inevitable process.

I also have nothing to hide - doesn't mean I want centralized exchanges and the huge number of third parties and governments they share data with spying on every satoshi I spend.

[Ultegra134]

Aren't you using exchanges, such as Binance or Bitstamp?

Nope. Bisq and LocalCryptos instead.

All exchanges now ask for identity verification, whether we like it or not, we'll have to face it.

All centralized exchanges.

I highly doubt that it's feasible to avoid such identification for long.

I've been avoiding it for years, and I plan to continue doing so.

I don't have much to hide, nor am I hiding huge amounts of Bitcoin that I'd rather not declare, it's an inevitable process.

I also have nothing to hide - doesn't mean I want centralized exchanges and the huge number of third parties and governments they share data with spying on every satoshi I spend.

I remember LocalBitcoins, a site I had accessed a few years ago, but asked for identification in order to trade. The services you've mentioned are not that well-known here, and not as direct as exchanges. Bisq on the other hand, is similar to DeFi exchanges, which certainly come in handy and could be used as an alternative indeed.

Most of my funds are in BSC, via the metamask wallet, thus, I certainly get your point, nor am I planning to move them anytime soon. However, when withdrawing to fiat, the most convenient is exchanges, and probably the most direct.

[Lucius]

Are you sure that you receive the emails from blockchain.com and they are not phishing emails?
I also have a wallet on blockchain.com. But I never receive email from them.

I also receive such emails on a daily basis, and I am pretty sure they come from a legitimate domain given their content. The reason why you do not receive them may be because you did not check this option in the blockchain account settings, or at some point, you unsubscribe from such e-mails.

I'm starting to believe that even wallet providers and exchanges are shifting towards a centralization of cryptocurrencies, debunking previous theories about anonymity of funds and personal freedom.
What are your thoughts about this? Do you think more and more services will adopt similar techniques?

I was never in the belief that cryptocurrencies were anonymous, and I’m surprised people are still thinking in that direction. Anonymity and privacy are not something that can be achieved nowadays without much effort and hassle, and if you want to hide from some powerful people because you did something bad, then the only way is to completely disappear from the grid.

Big Brother has bigger eyes than he had before, computers, smartphones, and TVs are constantly spying on us, and surveillance cameras and hundreds of satellites and drones overhead record our every move. It may just seem that way to me, but KYC on some crypto exchanges could be our least concern in the time to come.

[Ultegra134]

Are you sure that you receive the emails from blockchain.com and they are not phishing emails?
I also have a wallet on blockchain.com. But I never receive email from them.

I also receive such emails on a daily basis, and I am pretty sure they come from a legitimate domain given their content. The reason why you do not receive them may be because you did not check this option in the blockchain account settings, or at some point, you unsubscribe from such e-mails.

I'm starting to believe that even wallet providers and exchanges are shifting towards a centralization of cryptocurrencies, debunking previous theories about anonymity of funds and personal freedom.
What are your thoughts about this? Do you think more and more services will adopt similar techniques?

I was never in the belief that cryptocurrencies were anonymous, and I’m surprised people are still thinking in that direction. Anonymity and privacy are not something that can be achieved nowadays without much effort and hassle, and if you want to hide from some powerful people because you did something bad, then the only way is to completely disappear from the grid.

Big Brother has bigger eyes than he had before, computers, smartphones, and TVs are constantly spying on us, and surveillance cameras and hundreds of satellites and drones overhead record our every move. It may just seem that way to me, but KYC on some crypto exchanges could be our least concern in the time to come.

Now that you've said that, I receive newsletter emails from them on a daily basis, they've certainly changed how they used to function, a few years ago, they were nothing but a simple online wallet, you couldn't even recover your account if you lost the walletID.

Our data is being monitored on a daily basis, in a variety of ways, one of the most major ones, our mobile phones. Providing identification on an online exchange is only the tip of the iceberg, it's not like they're using them for marketing purposes. If I'm not mistaken (correct me if I'm wrong), exchanges only have to provide such information if requested by law enforcement, such as tax services, I might be wrong though.

[Charles-Tim]

I remember LocalBitcoins, a site I had accessed a few years ago, but asked for identification in order to trade. The services you've mentioned are not that well-known here, and not as direct as exchanges. Bisq on the other hand, is similar to DeFi exchanges, which certainly come in handy and could be used as an alternative indeed.

Most of my funds are in BSC, via the metamask wallet, thus, I certainly get your point, nor am I planning to move them anytime soon. However, when withdrawing to fiat, the most convenient is exchanges, and probably the most direct.

Bisq just still remains the most decentralized exchange, just that alerts can be managed on mobile app but the trades is through using personal computer using open-source software. This may not be convenient and the trading volume may not be as high as on centralized exchanges, but people that wants privacy still prefer it to centralized exchanges that demand for KYC.

Alternatively, you can still try Hodlhodl or Localcryptos. Localcryptos still have considerable high liquidity, try it before complaining that using centralized exchanges are more direct. There is nothing more direct than to send or receive bitcoin directly on an address generated by your noncustododial wallet rather than using centralized exchanges which you do not have the keys, you will still need to transfer the coins to noncustodial wallet to have full control over the coins.

Decentralized exchanges like Bisq is not the same as those altcoin exchanges that are altcoin based because you can not exchange to fiat on the altcoin based exchanges.

I was never in the belief that cryptocurrencies were anonymous, and I’m surprised people are still thinking in that direction. Anonymity and privacy are not something that can be achieved nowadays without much effort and hassle.

But you still meant that privacy and anonymity are still both possible, but just that it is not easy to maintain but some people are still having privacy while using bitcoin with the use of full client wallet like Bitcoin Core using Tor connection, some people have some transactions that are also anonymous as they use Tor on SPV noncustododial wallet for making transactions while not connecting with their IP address at all but only using Tor.

You are not wrong because many people have lost their privacy before they even know what privacy his while making use of bitcoin. But still if they know already, they can start being private and/or anonymize some transactions of their choice.

[pawanjain]

I'm starting to believe that even wallet providers and exchanges are shifting towards a centralization of cryptocurrencies, debunking previous theories about anonymity of funds and personal freedom.

What are your thoughts about this? Do you think more and more services will adopt similar techniques?

Ofcourse they are, why do you think most exchanges are asking for KYC details these days.
Exchanges are holding their user's personal details linking to their crypto portfolio.
As cryptocurrencies get more adopted the governments will probably use the KYC details for regulation.
This will increase the centralization but will also bring in mass adoption of cryptocurrencies.
Privacy coins will still exist but only those who care more about privacy will stick to those cryptocurrencies.

[Ultegra134]

I remember LocalBitcoins, a site I had accessed a few years ago, but asked for identification in order to trade. The services you've mentioned are not that well-known here, and not as direct as exchanges. Bisq on the other hand, is similar to DeFi exchanges, which certainly come in handy and could be used as an alternative indeed.

Most of my funds are in BSC, via the metamask wallet, thus, I certainly get your point, nor am I planning to move them anytime soon. However, when withdrawing to fiat, the most convenient is exchanges, and probably the most direct.

Bisq just still remains the most decentralized exchange, just that alerts can be managed on mobile app but the trades is through using personal computer using open-source software. This may not be convenient and the trading volume may not be as high as on centralized exchanges, but people that wants privacy still prefer it to centralized exchanges that demand for KYC.

Alternatively, you can still try Hodlhodl or Localcryptos. Localcryptos still have considerable high liquidity, try it before complaining that using centralized exchanges are more direct. There is nothing more direct than to send or receive bitcoin directly on an address generated by your noncustododial wallet rather than using centralized exchanges which you do not have the keys, you will still need to transfer the coins to noncustodial wallet to have full control over the coins.

Decentralized exchanges like Bisq is not the same as those altcoin exchanges that are altcoin based because you can not exchange to fiat on the altcoin based exchanges.

I'm not implying that there aren't any decentralised services that could potentially substitute for exchange usage, but it's all I've used for the past years. I'm not underestimating the platforms you're mentioning, nor the need for decentralisation, personally, I'm storing my funds on Metamask, instead of an exchange or a custodial wallet.

My opinion is simply stands that our actions are easily monitored, unless you're avoiding Google, Facebook and banking services, your data is out there, providing your details on an exchange isn't something new, nor unusual.

[kryptqnick]

I used to keep my money in the Blockchain wallet, and I was okay with it. I had my pass phrase, password, 2FA. Then there was a time when I wanted to access my wallet, but the code from Blockchain just didn't arrive to my phone, and the email confirmation didn't arrive either. It was a technical issue, of course, and everything arrived the next day, but that's when I decided to move to Electrum, at least. I'm glad I did that, given how Blockchain is starting to involve KYC, reporting taxes and stuff. But as for the safety of storing money on Blockchain, I do believe they don't have access to passphrases and that technically the coins do belong to customers. Still, though, why risk it if there are good alternatives.

[Ultegra134]

I used to keep my money in the Blockchain wallet, and I was okay with it. I had my pass phrase, password, 2FA. Then there was a time when I wanted to access my wallet, but the code from Blockchain just didn't arrive to my phone, and the email confirmation didn't arrive either. It was a technical issue, of course, and everything arrived the next day, but that's when I decided to move to Electrum, at least. I'm glad I did that, given how Blockchain is starting to involve KYC, reporting taxes and stuff. But as for the safety of storing money on Blockchain, I do believe they don't have access to passphrases and that technically the coins do belong to customers. Still, though, why risk it if there are good alternatives.

If I'm not mistaken, as you've also mentioned, Blockchain.com does provide you with your seed phrase and private key. Although, I've also faced similar issues with what you've claimed. Not on the same platform, it was BitGo, was my fault though and not the service's.

I had lost access to my 2FA device, resetting it requires 48 hours, for security purposes of course. As a result, I lost a great trading opportunity, and that's one of the reasons I turned to Electrum, even though it was purely my fault.