🔥 No KYC Crypto Casinos & Sites | NoToKYC.com | 💸 500$ Wagering Contest 💸

[Zwei]

Usually casino with kyc has less fraud that the casino without kyc. Passing kyc preventing the fraud.

Do you have any proof that Know Your Customer reduces fraud?  Know Your Customer is now an almost global procedure for many services.  Yet I still have not seen any statistics on the News showing it led to any statistically significant reduction of fraud, Money Laundering et cetera.

you are asking a braindead shill account who only job is to bump the thread with nonsense, i would be surprised if he comes back here to answer that.

However, although I understand why so many customers do not like verifying their identity, I still think kyc has some advantages.

just a few weeks ago, a casino after taking a player KYC info, they started threatening to sue him for defamation: https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=5562065.msg65953555#msg65953555
that's just one example of many as to why no one likes giving KYC info. not to mention, if your KYC info gets hacked and leaked/sold, it would be a fucking nightmare if someone steals your identity and starts using it for shady shit.

For example, it can help service providers/companies identify and profile cheaters.

never worked before, cheaters and exploiters will always find a way around.

For customers, if a customer has verified his identity, it will be easier for him to recover his hacked/lost accounts as all he has to do is to re-submit his documents to prove he is the real owner of the account.

there are other ways they could do that, IP address, transaction history, linked email/phone number, your first deposit tx, signed message from a withdrawal address, etc...
i would say KYC should only be required if you can't verify ownership with those details.

[PrivacyG]

However, although I understand why so many customers do not like verifying their identity, I still think kyc has some advantages.

With zero doubt, there are advantages to Know Your Customer.  But the very few advantages are equal to absolute zero in the face of the possible consequences of it.

Exactly like any other dystopian law, Know Your Customer is a law and a procedure camouflaged under the innocent image that you are being protected by it.  And like you say, there are situations where it does help.  I lost accounts my self and Money because I did not want to send any personal documents.  And it is what it is, if I send my documents even now I will still able to recover most of it but I will never do it.

Now if you send your personal documents to recover an account, particularly when it comes to useless platforms such as Facebook then it is a stupid thing in my opinion to do.  You are giving your information for free to a website being targeted by hackers 24 out of 7 hoping to extract any thing from it.  And if you end up on a list like some Ledger Hardware Wallet customers did a long time ago with your Full Name, Address, Phone Number, Bank Account et cetera, you will be screwed.

It can be worse however.  If by the next election in your country an extremist party will win, they may turn against every body who used Bitcoin.  Or people who had particular interests on their Facebook profile.  And now you become a target all of a sudden.

I agree even that Central Bank Digital Currencies will have a few advantages.  But just like Know Your Customer, they mean nothing if they are going to be used against us for the most part by controlling what we buy, when we buy and selling data bases of our shopping habits et cetera.  I like looking at what is positive, what is negative and then decide.  I can not decide at all that Know Your Customer is beneficial to us in 99 percent of the cases an ID is asked for.

[rat03gopoh]

Usually casino with kyc has less fraud that the casino without kyc.

KYC can be used as a tool to deny withdrawals/winnings. This is how 1xbit used to operate, which is now labeled a scam casino.

Passing kyc preventing the fraud.

How does it work? "Hey, I'm KYCed, pls don't scam me!"

[Barikui1]

Lets say I deposited $100 in a casino and lost 50% of that while playing, there will be no problem. Assuming I get lucky to turn the balance of $50 to $500k, then casinos will suddenly demand for KYC, does this make any sense? They know the source of the fund so what are they trying to protect or know when they know I won the money genuinely from their platform.

In a scenario like that, I still don't think that their demand for kyc is about not wanting to pay or trying to protect anything, I believe that before a casino ask for kyc verification, they just want to know the customer for documentation, just in case of anything, that such person may be needed in the future.

The only thing they do this is mostly to buy time and see if the player will gamble the money away.

Their is a possibility that this might be true, but I don't think it's because of that in most cases.

Another reason may also be to find a reason not to pay the player.

This will only be possible if the casino is broke and unreliable.

[Mr Reporter]

Do you have any proof that Know Your Customer reduces fraud?  Know Your Customer is now an almost global procedure for many services.  Yet I still have not seen any statistics on the News showing it led to any statistically significant reduction of fraud, Money Laundering et cetera.

I'm not aware of any official statistics or studies proving that kyc has helped reduce fraud. However, although I understand why so many customers do not like verifying their identity, I still think kyc has some advantages. For example, it can help service providers/companies identify and profile cheaters. For customers, if a customer has verified his identity, it will be easier for him to recover his hacked/lost accounts as all he has to do is to re-submit his documents to prove he is the real owner of the account.

Me I really don't know to what extent kyc can be of  a security but however  I know it might be some sought of security system but the level to which it is secured is what I don't know of . And secondly if the details and informations provided upon kyc verification can not be said to be secured and free from random and public access then it can be said to be risky but i

KYC is basically a verification process, and how secure it is really depends on the platform’s tech encryption, access controls, audits, etc, If the data isn’t properly encrypted or is shared widely, that definitely raises risk.

sounds like you’re curious about the nuts‑and‑bolts of how KYC data is protected.

KYC platforms usually lock down data with a mix of TLS for the transmission and AES‑256 at rest, plus hashing for things like IDs. Some also throw in tokenization so the raw info never even sits on their servers.

[khaled0111]

just a few weeks ago, a casino after taking a player KYC info, they started threatening to sue him for defamation: https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=5562065.msg65953555#msg65953555
that's just one example of many as to why no one likes giving KYC info. not to mention, if your KYC info gets hacked and leaked/sold, it would be a fucking nightmare if someone steals your identity and starts using it for shady shit.

I have been following that scam accusation thread and I’m well aware of the most recent developments.
Sorry if this is a bit off-topic and I’m not trying to defend Wina here, but don’t you think they would never have considered taking this case to court if they knew they were at fault? As I said earlier, one of the main reasons service providers ask customers to complete kyc (they usually do this right before banning the account) is to profile cheaters. In this case, they simply wanted to know who that person was so they can deal with him in person.

It’s a complicated case. You may think what they did was unethical, while someone else may say they were within their rights to do so in order to protect their business.

[GiftedMAN]

I'm not aware of any official statistics or studies proving that kyc has helped reduce fraud. However, although I understand why so many customers do not like verifying their identity, I still think kyc has some advantages. For example, it can help service providers/companies identify and profile cheaters. For customers, if a customer has verified his identity, it will be easier for him to recover his hacked/lost accounts as all he has to do is to re-submit his documents to prove he is the real owner of the account.

If there is no record where KYC has helped to reduce fraud then what is the need of the casinos insisting her customers to do kyc when the primary need for it has not been used to identify any fraud? Customers are scared of releasing their identity because they do not trust their identity with the casinos since there is no guarantee of safe keeping of their details but in the case of hack or lost accounts I think it should be on the customers to choose to do KYC incase of lait of account so it shouldn't be forced on them since they stand the chance to lose their accounts and funds if their accounts are hacked or lost.

[Gentle_Soul]

I'm not aware of any official statistics or studies proving that kyc has helped reduce fraud. However, although I understand why so many customers do not like verifying their identity, I still think kyc has some advantages. For example, it can help service providers/companies identify and profile cheaters. For customers, if a customer has verified his identity, it will be easier for him to recover his hacked/lost accounts as all he has to do is to re-submit his documents to prove he is the real owner of the account.

If there is no record where KYC has helped to reduce fraud then what is the need of the casinos insisting her customers to do kyc when the primary need for it has not been used to identify any fraud? Customers are scared of releasing their identity because they do not trust their identity with the casinos since there is no guarantee of safe keeping of their details but in the case of hack or lost accounts I think it should be on the customers to choose to do KYC incase of lait of account so it shouldn't be forced on them since they stand the chance to lose their accounts and funds if their accounts are hacked or lost.

Exactly what I taught too because kyc is supposed to be some sort of security system so it should be guaranteed that this is what it is instead of it looking like not being certain exactly what it is. Kyc should be there to protect your account against any form of easy access and serve as a strong security system that should give some sort of protection on the account

[The Cryptovator]

Exactly what I taught too because kyc is supposed to be some sort of security system so it should be guaranteed that this is what it is instead of it looking like not being certain exactly what it is. Kyc should be there to protect your account against any form of easy access and serve as a strong security system that should give some sort of protection on the account

Trust me, KYC is one of the worst things in the crypto industry, including crypto casinos. KYC can't protect your account anyway, because scammers will not consider not to scam even when they know who you are. Scammers aren't your relatives, so leave your account from being scammed. Even crypto exchange KYC can't prevent you from being hacked. So there is no chance of account protection by KYC with any platforms.

Mainly they ask KYC to prevent money laundering according to them, but I am not sure how it works. Sometimes exchanges raise flags regarding suspicious transactions, but I'm not sure how casinos act when something goes wrong. The casino was probably forced to do KYC due to regulations, or it's just another scam tactic. No-KYC casino always better if they are reputable, otherwise casino should have prior notice regarding KYC policy.

[God Of Thunder]

Mainly they ask KYC to prevent money laundering according to them, but I am not sure how it works. Sometimes exchanges raise flags regarding suspicious transactions, but I'm not sure how casinos act when something goes wrong. The casino was probably forced to do KYC due to regulations, or it's just another scam tactic. No-KYC casino always better if they are reputable, otherwise casino should have prior notice regarding KYC policy.

The problem is, there are only a few no KYC casinos. Go to Notokyc.com and see that they listed 19 casinos; how many of them are actually no KYC? Of course, I am not a player of all those casinos. However, I played on the BC game, and I know it is a KYC-hungry casino. The regulators are getting stricter, and there are barely any KYC casinos around. All the licensed casinos actually ask for a KYC at some point, unless they explicitly mention that they have no KYC.

There are some casinos that claim to be a no KYC, but their TOS page clearly mentions that they reserve the right to perform KYC, which can be triggered anytime. Even though I do not like KYC at all, I still use those casinos because you don't have soo many other options.

[Promocodeudo]

I was thinking about same thing too for casino's to have more effective methods to detect scammers in their platforms, because requesting of KYC from casinos when someone want to withdraw his or her win's is already getting annoying, and my win's are already trapped in some gambling platforms just because the name I used in opening my accounts on those platforms didn't correspond with name on the account I want  use to withdrawing those win's, and what is even provoking me is that, I contacted their customer service and they said they can't help me on that, while I already I everything to prove that am the owner of the account. Please and please casinos should look into this aspect and look for a reasonable way to detect scammers and not this wey they are using.

First and foremost I will have to say sorry for your stress but all the samen you have to take the blame first because you caused the stress for yourself if you look at it from the angle that you weren't careful about using the corresponding details and the truth is that the customer care of the casino invoked were very clear to you,  if you really understand what KYC means, whatever details you want to use for the KYC must correspond with the one they have in there system to show that you're actually affirming that you're the owner of the exact details in their system, so you don't come up with what you want to convinced them with unless they are the one that ask for any other thing that can be used in replacing what the ask from you for the completion of the KYC.

[Mr Reporter]

I'm not aware of any official statistics or studies proving that kyc has helped reduce fraud. However, although I understand why so many customers do not like verifying their identity, I still think kyc has some advantages. For example, it can help service providers/companies identify and profile cheaters. For customers, if a customer has verified his identity, it will be easier for him to recover his hacked/lost accounts as all he has to do is to re-submit his documents to prove he is the real owner of the account.

If there is no record where KYC has helped to reduce fraud then what is the need of the casinos insisting her customers to do kyc when the primary need for it has not been used to identify any fraud? Customers are scared of releasing their identity because they do not trust their identity with the casinos since there is no guarantee of safe keeping of their details but in the case of hack or lost accounts I think it should be on the customers to choose to do KYC incase of lait of account so it shouldn't be forced on them since they stand the chance to lose their accounts and funds if their accounts are hacked or lost.

You raise a fair point—KYC isn’t a magic bullet that stops every fraud, and the evidence that it single handedly eliminates scams is mixed. What studies and industry reports do show is that robust KYC processes.

At the same time, many players are wary of sharing personal data, especially when breaches have exposed millions of records in the past. That’s why some jurisdictions allow  optional KYC for low‑risk accounts—customers can still deposit and play, but with caps on withdrawals or transaction limits until they choose to verify their identity.

[PrivacyG]

sounds like you’re curious about the nuts‑and‑bolts of how KYC data is protected.

KYC platforms usually lock down data with a mix of TLS for the transmission and AES‑256 at rest, plus hashing for things like IDs. Some also throw in tokenization so the raw info never even sits on their servers.

These are stories to tell children at night.  It is ideal that they are doing as much as possible to protect our information and I hope they do.

And then you find out it is all stored on an USB Stick like ex Binance CEO did.  Unfortunately a lot of people know what to do but never follow the same steps themselves.  See how The United Kingdom is doing with the personal information leaks after their Internet censorship.

[God Of Thunder]

The legislation in many countries becomes even more strict and soon lt will be even less no kyc casinos.
State authorites want to contal us more and more.

This is unfortunate, but what can we actually do about it? There are only a few casinos like Metawin that have no KYC. If some casinos can operate without KYC, why can't others? These are the questions I ask myself. But unfortunately, this is how it is. The regulators are tightening the rules more and more, and the casinos are forcing the players to complete the KYC. Some countries are even banning casinos.

We have seen some casinos stop operating, even on the forum, due to these regulations. Yologroup closed its operations on the unregulated market, and I am afraid that more and more casinos will follow suit due to the regulations.

[Cointxz]

There are some casinos that claim to be a no KYC, but their TOS page clearly mentions that they reserve the right to perform KYC, which can be triggered anytime. Even though I do not like KYC at all, I still use those casinos because you don't have soo many other options.

The term of No KYC these days are attributed for not forcing user to do a mandatory KYCon their withdrawal or registration which other casino is now enforcing.

Even big casino now do a mandatory KYC to all existing members. I believe this No KYC casino knew this facts on tightening KYC that’s why they are trying to their KYC flexibility as way to have a pseudo No KYC feature.

[Odohu]

The problem is, there are only a few no KYC casinos. Go to Notokyc.com and see that they listed 19 casinos; how many of them are actually no KYC? Of course, I am not a player of all those casinos. However, I played on the BC game, and I know it is a KYC-hungry casino. The regulators are getting stricter, and there are barely any KYC casinos around. All the licensed casinos actually ask for a KYC at some point, unless they explicitly mention that they have no KYC.

There are some casinos that claim to be a no KYC, but their TOS page clearly mentions that they reserve the right to perform KYC, which can be triggered anytime. Even though I do not like KYC at all, I still use those casinos because you don't have soo many other options.

I have played in many casinos and I have not done KYC before, maybe it could be because I have not won big amount of money that might forced the casinos to request for KYC which is always in their TOS. So, no KYC still exist since it is not mandatory to do it before you deposit, play and withdraw unless maybe the casino suspect some unusual activities with the player.

[Mahdirakib]

Looks like the post bumpers are really helping this thread to appear at the top. As a result, it is getting the attention of other forum members, and the forum members are continuously making discussions here. Everyone is discussing about KYC and No-KYC related things, but no one is talking about the NoToKYC.com services. Does any of you agree with listing system of NoToKYC? They are providing inaccurate information about the KYC verification requirement of the casinos.

[MainIbem]

I have played in many casinos and I have not done KYC before, maybe it could be because I have not won big amount of money that might forced the casinos to request for KYC which is always in their TOS. So, no KYC still exist since it is not mandatory to do it before you deposit, play and withdraw unless maybe the casino suspect some unusual activities with the player.

Anyone who loves privacy would definitely avoid KYC, not everyone would want to expose their identity to a platform for certain reasons but just like you said a player might come across it one way or the other whether they like it or not. Some casinos who claim to be non kyc would request for it when they're suspicious of certain amount you deposit into your wallet while others might request for it when you win a huge amount of money to be sure you don't go against their gambling policy, like gambling below the age bracket of 18+.

[Zwei]

Sorry if this is a bit off-topic and I’m not trying to defend Wina here, but don’t you think they would never have considered taking this case to court if they knew they were at fault?

nope, but they were not threatening to sue him over the win that they didn't want to pay, they were threatening to sue him over the scam accusation he posted. i doubt they were actually going to go through with that, it was just a scare tactic imo to get him to agree to the "deal", and it kinda worked since he took the post down.

As I said earlier, one of the main reasons service providers ask customers to complete kyc (they usually do this right before banning the account) is to profile cheaters. In this case, they simply wanted to know who that person was so they can deal with him in person.

fair enough.

It’s a complicated case. You may think what they did was unethical, while someone else may say they were within their rights to do so in order to protect their business.

both can be true at the same time, to protect their business they do unethical shit.

Looks like the post bumpers are really helping this thread to appear at the top. As a result, it is getting the attention of other forum members, and the forum members are continuously making discussions here.

at least there aren't that many shilling accounts anymore (unless their posts get deleted before i see them).

Everyone is discussing about KYC and No-KYC related things, but no one is talking about the NoToKYC.com services. Does any of you agree with listing system of NoToKYC? They are providing inaccurate information about the KYC verification requirement of the casinos.

i think i made my opinion about NoToKYC crystal clear, their listing system is bullshit.

[Wakate]

Everyone is discussing about KYC and No-KYC related things, but no one is talking about the NoToKYC.com services. Does any of you agree with listing system of NoToKYC? They are providing inaccurate information about the KYC verification requirement of the casinos.

Almost all these casinos are crazy liers and they will do everything possible to get you to use their platform to play bets since they'll gonna make money from that. I have some annoying experiences from some of the advertised casinos here and I just have to keep my grudges to myself because writing and complaining would not solve the problem when the casino team knows what they are doing. Make a deposit through Solana network on Cloudbet and tell if you will not be asked to do level 2 KYC before any withdrawal.