KYC VS digital verification ?

[DrBeer]

There is a lot of talk about KYC as an unsafe procedure, for some people it is acceptable, for some people it is not, some people think it is really dangerous, etc. The essence of the problem boils down to the fact that the user undergoing KYC has to pass data to a third party, in videnomers phone, e-mail, copies/photos of documents, statements, etc. information. Yes, this does not carry the best connotation, more so in case of data theft, in case of inadequate security of the party conducting KYC.

Question to the participants of the topic - would you agree that instead of KYC there would be a procedure, for example, to confirm identity, without data transfer, for example, through banking applications ? For example, in Ukraine we have an effective model with identification through banking applications, i.e. through BankID identifier. Or through an official application certifying your identity. Again in Ukraine there is a state application “Diya”, which is some kind of digital passport, and it provides such a function. In this case, the identity is confirmed without transferring photos, videos, copies of documents, etc.
 

On the one hand we fulfill the KYC requirements of the regulatory authorities, but on the other hand we do not give them any data

[_act_]

I used a number given by the government, but through the bank to get verified on an exchange that I am using.

I do not have to get verified on the local gambling site in my country, the gambling sites can easily get your information from the bank you are using. The name you used to register on the gambling site must be the same from the account of the bank you will use to deposit money into the gambling site.

The one that was proposed few years ago was blockchain verification in a way you can get verified by the sites if you have your information on the blockchain, but which I think is also very bad.

[Filicius]

It is clear that the current model of KYC is outdated and has to evolve, but for years there have been proposals of solutions to verify online identity without sacrificing anonymity and it seems that no solution has been able to impose itself. In France for example they've started using some kind of electronic ID, and this is not the first Government to propose such a solution, and I had also heard about proposals that work on the blockchain.

In the case mentioned, if your bank details are already able to identify you, it should be enough and you should not have to follow the entire KYC procedure.

[Findingnemo]

I don't see any difference, even if we use the official app from government or banking channels for the verification process still they have to share the data with the casino or the exchange to verify the credentials that means the data can be stored somewhere and even the banks can use your data as they wish which is the reason why we get random calls for credit card offers and such.

Countries that protects the privacy will have laws that restricts them from using and in case if they found in data break or unauthorized access they wil face the legal consequences.

[Ronsbit]

There is a lot of talk about KYC as an unsafe procedure, for some people it is acceptable, for some people it is not, some people think it is really dangerous, etc. The essence of the problem boils down to the fact that the user undergoing KYC has to pass data to a third party, in videnomers phone, e-mail, copies/photos of documents, statements, etc. information. Yes, this does not carry the best connotation, more so in case of data theft, in case of inadequate security of the party conducting KYC.

Question to the participants of the topic - would you agree that instead of KYC there would be a procedure, for example, to confirm identity, without data transfer, for example, through banking applications ? For example, in Ukraine we have an effective model with identification through banking applications, i.e. through BankID identifier. Or through an official application certifying your identity. Again in Ukraine there is a state application “Diya”, which is some kind of digital passport, and it provides such a function. In this case, the identity is confirmed without transferring photos, videos, copies of documents, etc.
 

On the one hand we fulfill the KYC requirements of the regulatory authorities, but on the other hand we do not give them any data

This is an excellent idea where one can undergo verification without data transfer as long as the third parties are all interconnected to verify each member genuinty, there is nothing to worry about, as the approval seems that such an account holder is legit. But my own thought is this: would it not be easier for the government to be able to track and know those who own crypto through this medium of verification through such settings? How sure are we that the identity of people would not be exploited on the other end of it all?

[PX-Z]

If your example could be applied for all of us then that means there will be centralized app/platform where we do KYC initially. Or say the app Diia, from your country, we have that kind as well, something like a digital national id that can be verified through the app as well but for people who doesn't have such kind of verification, that will be a problem.

[danherbias07]

Here in our country, phone numbers are now registered to a user, which means the data is there too. When someone calls with only a number, it can tell if it is a spam call because it is not registered to the local system.

I think that could also work, but only for local online casinos. Offshore online casinos that require KYC will have a hard time getting that information, so they will still need to apply the basic KYC, which is providing legal documents and other information, so that they won't have issues with the Anti-Money Laundering Act.
That is why local casinos don't mind if someone doesn't pass the KYC as long as they use the phone number registered to the player. They will also know that he or she is of legal age to gamble.

[Sandra_hakeem]

Question to the participants of the topic - would you agree that instead of KYC there would be a procedure, for example, to confirm identity, without data transfer, for example, through banking applications ? For example, in Ukraine we have an effective model with identification through banking applications, i.e. through BankID identifier. Or through an official application certifying your identity. Again in Ukraine there is a state application “Diya”, which is some kind of digital passport, and it provides such a function. In this case, the identity is confirmed without transferring photos, videos, copies of documents, etc.

Unless they have something they all stand to lose, we should evolve from old verification method. The rampant data breach has made so many develop cold feet to let their information out, so a new system is all we're waiting for.

Although in my country, just like the "Diya" in yours, we have what we know as the NIN which is a government issued/licensed card. It bears an identification number that has detailed information about a person, but can only be accessed by the government. If the number is valid, I don't have to submit anything else separately to a casino.

On the one hand we fulfill the KYC requirements of the regulatory authorities, but on the other hand we do not give them any data

All we need to a general adoption.

[YOSHIE]

KYC VS digital verification ?

I remember where I work currently all employees have to be digitally absent, with two options.
1. Fingerprint.
2. Face scan.

Here we can take an example, maybe if the industry implemented digital KYC, without requiring identification I think it could, every online casino would have to add a fingerprint option, This means that every visitor who enters an online casino account must be fingerprinted, of course fingerprinted after a several-stage process which can prove that it is a genuine visitor with the data application process.

I think fingerprinting is the best way to enter online casinos, without a kyc process, or a facial scan is also good.

[Powerjumboo]

For us, doing KYC is a lot of trouble because most people in crypto currency do not like KYC and do not agree to submit KYC. Since many people do not agree to do KYC, I think people will not like it if the digital verification system is introduced because people always want to stay clear of these troubles and do not want to get involved in any trouble. People prefer all the casino platforms that require verification, especially those platforms that are free of KYC verification in most of the current casino platforms.

[Btcdeybodi]

There's no much difference between using KYC documents and undergoing digital verification because it still exposes one's personal data to a third party all in the name of verification. Casinos should just use a strong security policy to protect user's data on their platforms so that it doesn't get hacked and stolen. The major reason for KYC is to prevent financial crimes such as money laundering but is there no way to track money laundering without KYC?

[KTChampions]

There is a lot of talk about KYC as an unsafe procedure, for some people it is acceptable, for some people it is not, some people think it is really dangerous, etc. The essence of the problem boils down to the fact that the user undergoing KYC has to pass data to a third party, in videnomers phone, e-mail, copies/photos of documents, statements, etc. information. Yes, this does not carry the best connotation, more so in case of data theft, in case of inadequate security of the party conducting KYC.

Question to the participants of the topic - would you agree that instead of KYC there would be a procedure, for example, to confirm identity, without data transfer, for example, through banking applications ? For example, in Ukraine we have an effective model with identification through banking applications, i.e. through BankID identifier. Or through an official application certifying your identity. Again in Ukraine there is a state application “Diya”, which is some kind of digital passport, and it provides such a function. In this case, the identity is confirmed without transferring photos, videos, copies of documents, etc.
 

On the one hand we fulfill the KYC requirements of the regulatory authorities, but on the other hand we do not give them any data

This is probably a good initiative, but I need an even more secure system. I am speaking in the context of the fact that user identification is now being promoted everywhere with the supposed goal of protecting children from inappropriate content. Let's say I believe this nonsense (that it's for child protection), but I need access to platforms without any identification whatsoever. I'm willing to prove I'm over 18, but I want to remain completely anonymous. I think it's technically easy to do: you go through the full verification process in one place and receive a token that you can then use to access platforms, but it should be impossible to identify the owner of this token. Something like hashing.

[Mahiyammahi]

I think this can only be possible if you're government is flexible with gambling . It not causing any issue for the gambler and the casino winner both. So I think after fulfilling these condition on both sides they came up with this way solution. But countries like my one which has gambling totally ban it's not easy to operate a casino platform. Still lots of agents are doing their JOB for casino. Although it's ban from government but it's almost like unofficially ruling . If you asks majority of  our people they would just agree that gambling is legal cause they don't even have the idea.

So it's totally depends on your county and their policies how flexible they are with casino. Also if casino are interested to operate flexible with the government or not.

[Cryptomultiplier]

There's no much difference between using KYC documents and undergoing digital verification because it still exposes one's personal data to a third party all in the name of verification. Casinos should just use a strong security policy to protect user's data on their platforms so that it doesn't get hacked and stolen. The major reason for KYC is to prevent financial crimes such as money laundering but is there no way to track money laundering without KYC?

My point exactly. Kyc requirements is also done in reference to fulfillment of AML policies and whether it is kyc requirements or digital verification, both exposes a users data to a third party server that anything can happen to.
The best bet always to avoid any of such verifications would be to simply use a decentralized platform totally separate and free from data sharing by kyc or digital verification.

[DrBeer]

It is clear that the current model of KYC is outdated and has to evolve, but for years there have been proposals of solutions to verify online identity without sacrificing anonymity and it seems that no solution has been able to impose itself. In France for example they've started using some kind of electronic ID, and this is not the first Government to propose such a solution, and I had also heard about proposals that work on the blockchain.

In the case mentioned, if your bank details are already able to identify you, it should be enough and you should not have to follow the entire KYC procedure.

The problem is that this is an "anachronism in the digital world". Paper copies, scanned documents, photos... Why do we need all this when there are government-issued IDs that would immediately solve a host of problems: confirming that you are who you say you are, your age, gender, citizenship, and other information—but...without sharing that information with a third party. At the same time, the government would be confident that the rules are being followed. Moreover, it would be quite difficult to circumvent or forge such a system—at the very least, significantly more difficult than with paper copies.

[Fortify]

There is a lot of talk about KYC as an unsafe procedure, for some people it is acceptable, for some people it is not, some people think it is really dangerous, etc. The essence of the problem boils down to the fact that the user undergoing KYC has to pass data to a third party, in videnomers phone, e-mail, copies/photos of documents, statements, etc. information. Yes, this does not carry the best connotation, more so in case of data theft, in case of inadequate security of the party conducting KYC.

Question to the participants of the topic - would you agree that instead of KYC there would be a procedure, for example, to confirm identity, without data transfer, for example, through banking applications ? For example, in Ukraine we have an effective model with identification through banking applications, i.e. through BankID identifier. Or through an official application certifying your identity. Again in Ukraine there is a state application “Diya”, which is some kind of digital passport, and it provides such a function. In this case, the identity is confirmed without transferring photos, videos, copies of documents, etc.
 

On the one hand we fulfill the KYC requirements of the regulatory authorities, but on the other hand we do not give them any data

Your suggestion doesn't make much sense or you've not described it well enough for anyone to judge it correctly? There is definitely an idea there, where there should ideally be a single and trusted third party service - maybe funded by but not owned by the government, who can manage peoples digital identity. Somebody should be able to provide some sort of token or sign on to any site that needs verification, have it checked by this system and confirmed. However having it all centralized would make it a big target for any attackers so it would need to be highly secure and constantly defended, if it got hacked then it would probably never recover trust again. So it seems this current web of third party providers or in house checks is the only way for it to work, you just need to be very careful where you send your private documents like ID because they can be used against you in all sorts of ways - stick with the very biggest sites who have had years to perfect the process.

[DrBeer]

There is a lot of talk about KYC as an unsafe procedure, for some people it is acceptable, for some people it is not, some people think it is really dangerous, etc. The essence of the problem boils down to the fact that the user undergoing KYC has to pass data to a third party, in videnomers phone, e-mail, copies/photos of documents, statements, etc. information. Yes, this does not carry the best connotation, more so in case of data theft, in case of inadequate security of the party conducting KYC.

Question to the participants of the topic - would you agree that instead of KYC there would be a procedure, for example, to confirm identity, without data transfer, for example, through banking applications ? For example, in Ukraine we have an effective model with identification through banking applications, i.e. through BankID identifier. Or through an official application certifying your identity. Again in Ukraine there is a state application “Diya”, which is some kind of digital passport, and it provides such a function. In this case, the identity is confirmed without transferring photos, videos, copies of documents, etc.
 

On the one hand we fulfill the KYC requirements of the regulatory authorities, but on the other hand we do not give them any data

Your suggestion doesn't make much sense or you've not described it well enough for anyone to judge it correctly? There is definitely an idea there, where there should ideally be a single and trusted third party service - maybe funded by but not owned by the government, who can manage peoples digital identity. Somebody should be able to provide some sort of token or sign on to any site that needs verification, have it checked by this system and confirmed. However having it all centralized would make it a big target for any attackers so it would need to be highly secure and constantly defended, if it got hacked then it would probably never recover trust again. So it seems this current web of third party providers or in house checks is the only way for it to work, you just need to be very careful where you send your private documents like ID because they can be used against you in all sorts of ways - stick with the very biggest sites who have had years to perfect the process.

It’s hard for me to explain if similar services aren’t available or implemented in your country.
The idea is simple: there’s a banking app (in our country, virtually every bank offers such a service), and it can be connected to other platforms. For example, if I buy a new car, I have to manually enter a lot of information into the government vehicle registration app. But there’s an alternative: I log in using my bank’s BankID, for example, and it sends the necessary data-full name, passport number, insurance number, vehicle details, registration number, and other information required by the system-to the other service.
 
Or, for example, if I want to sign a petition to Parliament, I use the government system "Diya", which applies my digital signature to the petition and verifies that it was indeed me who signed it.

This is roughly how it works. But this requires a sufficiently developed mechanism for digital government services.

[shawonngp]

For us, doing KYC is a lot of trouble because most people in crypto currency do not like KYC and do not agree to submit KYC. Since many people do not agree to do KYC, I think people will not like it if the digital verification system is introduced because people always want to stay clear of these troubles and do not want to get involved in any trouble. People prefer all the casino platforms that require verification, especially those platforms that are free of KYC verification in most of the current casino platforms.

In many cases in crypto, there is no alternative way of KYC verification. If you want to trade on a centralized exchange, then KYC is mandatory in most of the exchanges; otherwise, you have to use a decentralised exchange. But in the case of casino gambling, no one is interested in submitting KYC; everyone wants to use a non-KYC platform. Digital verification is better than KYC because here, only face verification and fingerprint submission are required. Moreover, no personal documents are required.

[knuckey]

Question to the participants of the topic - would you agree that instead of KYC there would be a procedure, for example, to confirm identity, without data transfer, for example, through banking applications ? For example, in Ukraine we have an effective model with identification through banking applications, i.e. through BankID identifier. Or through an official application certifying your identity. Again in Ukraine there is a state application “Diya”, which is some kind of digital passport, and it provides such a function. In this case, the identity is confirmed without transferring photos, videos, copies of documents, etc.

Your idea is interesting. But the government's eyes are everywhere. Is it possible for such a compromise to be accepted? Governments typically don't want the hassle and require accurate data. I understand that as a casino site user, I sometimes consider handing over my data for many reasons, the main one being privacy. Currently, I'm only choosing a few gambling sites and avoiding KYC whenever possible. But I pray that such a compromise exists.

[Dr.Bitcoin_Strange]

Having such a verification method would actually be nice because it would not require bettors to submit all their information to the casinos, I was thinking about it in a different way where one can have a code that verifies their identity, if you submit it to the casinos, they would only be able to detect that you name matched with your registration details but not having a full information about your data such as address or picture, that would be nice.