KYC VS digital verification ?

[DrBeer]

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.

What you’re describing is a classic case of shifting the burden of responsibility onto the citizen. We had a similar situation here 20 years ago-a bunch of government agencies, long lines, certificates, paperwork, stamps… A huge amount of wasted time and minimal efficiency. Then we began digitizing government services, and now I can get most of the necessary documents, statements, and other materials online with just a couple of clicks. Electronic statements, electronic queues—everything is transparent, clear, and... there’s minimal corruption in these services! I think it makes sense to adopt such solutions.

[Z_MBFM]

It is clear that the current model of KYC is outdated and has to evolve, but for years there have been proposals of solutions to verify online identity without sacrificing anonymity and it seems that no solution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.

When you provide a bank statement somewhere as your personal document, there must be enough information to verify you. A bank statement contains your full name, phone number and address and a summary of how much money you transact with that bank, so of course a bank statement can be a legal document of an individual. If a platform accepts a bank statement as a legal document, then of course anyone can use it, but I am not interested in using bank statements because here you can see financial activity and a summary of how much money is transacted every day. So I think it is better not to provide a bank statement anywhere. The citizen card issued by the government is enough for KYC.

[Wakate]

There is something like this in China and I have seen that more countries would soon start implementing it to help the government to have access to citizens without any stress. Digital identity is quite okay and it's better than doing multiple KYC identification in a casino that can use your information to do harm to you. Since the government does not have access to the information most of these casinos are asking us, it shows that we are not really safe keeping information with a casino.

[Achalugo BTC]

There is something like this in China and I have seen that more countries would soon start implementing it to help the government to have access to citizens without any stress. Digital identity is quite okay and it's better than doing multiple KYC identification in a casino that can use your information to do harm to you. Since the government does not have access to the information most of these casinos are asking us, it shows that we are not really safe keeping information with a casino.

You are completely right, digital verification will really be of help and useful for one not to risks of doing KYC verification that they can still use against one, and there is no protection in such verification, as they can either be scam through it. But with this digital verification, one won't have to do any KYC any time they sign up somewhere else and also their data will be safe, as there will no chance for them to get scammed.

[Findingnemo]

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.

Without a KYC, we can't have a biometric verification, so one must do a one time KYC for the biometric validation and again it is going to add more concern to our privacy issues. No one wants a random online platform to have our fingerprints, retina scan and what else and who know where they can use it in the future.

The existing system is actually the better compared to any, we may lack convenience by giving out the ID whenever required is less riskier than giving our whole data to them.

[AmoreJaz]

There is something like this in China and I have seen that more countries would soon start implementing it to help the government to have access to citizens without any stress. Digital identity is quite okay and it's better than doing multiple KYC identification in a casino that can use your information to do harm to you. Since the government does not have access to the information most of these casinos are asking us, it shows that we are not really safe keeping information with a casino.

You are completely right, digital verification will really be of help and useful for one not to risks of doing KYC verification that they can still use against one, and there is no protection in such verification, as they can either be scam through it. But with this digital verification, one won't have to do any KYC any time they sign up somewhere else and also their data will be safe, as there will no chance for them to get scammed.

I would go for digital verification as well, because in this case, you don't need to undergo kyc verification every time you want to get in in a casino as you can easily swipe it in their terminal and go thru. It will also lessen the entities holding your kyc details and with this, only the government has actually the possession of your personal details.

[terrific]

It's still providing them with the information that we've already sent and verified with the banks.
But I think that the advantage of it is that it's less hassle for us because we know what data we're providing for them through that verification.
Although there's mere difference about it as what people still like is about the no kyc about it although it can't be helped anymore as it becomes more acceptable in all services online that we go through kyc process.

[Lida93]

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.

I think what you're implying is a national identity number and since it's a local gambling platform not offshore they just need that number to get all genuine information about you the gambler without having to go further for more documentation as we get to experience form all these international/offshore casinos platforms we using. When it comes to KYC locally I agree it's more simplified than when using an offshore platform, hence those extra requirements.

[Odohu]

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 method is fine but I don't think some governments will allow such thing to happen. Don't forget that the essence of KYC is for the authorities to know who is doing the business and transaction to ensure that issues like drug trafficking, child abuse, money laundering and others are checked. Unfortunately, KYC have failed to solve these problems or even make significant impact in the mission. What they do is empower some third party to harvest the biodata of people, some of whom sell them to other people.

[EluguHcman]

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

I don't really understand how this system of identity works at your end as illustrated.
You mean you are verified by the authorities on a KYC required process and you don't give them any of your details?
How then is your identity confirmed?
At least they should need any form of your documentary which confirms your identity before the process is successful.

Honestly this is totally strange to me.
However, if the casino can enroll on this pattern, I think it will be eased for those who don't find it comfortable on given any means of their identities to the authorities.
Would be a welcomed development if possible but I am still skeptic how true this could be.

[Myleschetty]

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.

Yes, and that's because it has serious disadvantages that come with it. Those who perceive it as friendly re yet to understand or pinpoint the danger that comes with it.

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.

Correct. They don't take good security precautions by storing people's personal information on internet-connected devices, and nothing is ever safe on the internet.

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.

I supported any process that safeguards private information while also protecting the user's interests especially in gambling.

[Orpichukwu]

There is not much difference here; for the casino or the platform to be able to verify you through those government-given IDs or whatever, they should have access to the database for them to be able to verify it, which means they can see the photo and the details needed from the data without you submitting it directly to them. The only difference might be they don't rely on others to do the verification, which increases the chances of data being leaked here; if it gets leaked, you know where the issue is directly coming from.

[Slow death]

This would be a good solution for local casinos, but for casinos operating internationally, I see that it will always be necessary to submit documents and go through facial scanning to comply with KYC. At least for now, most casinos or cryptocurrency exchanges are not charging for facial scanning in the KYC process. In my country, casinos only ask for national ID for KYC; they don't ask for anything else.

[colinistheman]

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.

There is a very significant difference in this. In the case of the Ukrainian Diya or Bank ID you do not need to upload a copy of your passport or a selfie to use each separate casino or crypto exchange. Through this thirdparty or betting sites get a digital confirmation like "Yes, this person is original and verified" - just in one place. But the exchanges or casinos will not be able to use or store your main original documents in any way. And in the old-fashioned KYC system dozens of sites store your sensitive scanned copies. So, if you compare the risk of data being hacked or leaked in this modern way is zero percent.

[fruktik]

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

Yes, that would be much better and safer. Personally, I almost never leave personal information anywhere, and I immediately walk away if someone asks for a selfie with my passport in hand. You don't have to look far to understand how dangerous such actions are. Nowadays, just typing "selfie with passport" into a search engine will return a huge database of photos of people who have taken such a step. Now anyone can use their personal information. They can even take out a loan, and the person will only find out about it later. It's always worth thinking twice.

[joeperry]

I actually don't have problems with that, in fact that's much better than the traditional KYC and I agree that using a third party is one of the problem and we really don't know how safe they're handling things on their end. A digital verification is much easier and faster but since they would use government ID's, etc. they would need to acquire license from certain country and it will not be easy and consider that they need to pay some fee. Also, not all country have that kind of digital ID in their government so they need to consider each of the country. So even though that was a good idea, it would be hard to apply in their platform.

[DrBeer]

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.

This works a little differently. For example, both banks and the government system I mentioned require verification up front. At a bank, for instance, when I open an account, I present my passport and tax ID number, and verify my mobile number and email address.
Based on this information, I then identify myself in the bank’s app. Verification works like this: on the website where I need to go through verification (such as KYC)
I click the “Identification via BankID” link and am taken to a page where I can select the bank or government system I need from a list; then the selected app opens on my mobile phone, a prompt appears asking, “Do you want to confirm your identity on such-and-such a platform?”,
I confirm, an exchange takes place via a special protocol, and the platform verifies that I am who I say I am,  and transmits the pre-agreed data. However, the data is not transmitted in plain text and must be stored in accordance with a data storage protocol that ensures security.
  

[cryptoaddictchie]

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

How come you didnt gave any data if you also fulfill the bank requirements on the authorities. For me theres no difference at all cause authorities served as third party and has the information of users. Even they say they dont have access theres a chance that they have somehow access to it.

Like in the case of Snowden which he unveils what the US is doing and alledgely trying to cover that they are monitoring  users through their data privacy. Maybe the same case here.

[DrBeer]

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 method is fine but I don't think some governments will allow such thing to happen. Don't forget that the essence of KYC is for the authorities to know who is doing the business and transaction to ensure that issues like drug trafficking, child abuse, money laundering and others are checked. Unfortunately, KYC have failed to solve these problems or even make significant impact in the mission. What they do is empower some third party to harvest the biodata of people, some of whom sell them to other people.

The advantage of digital identification, in the model I described, is that it is much more difficult to create a fake identity, because its authenticity is verified by government registries and banks, which link banking verification processes with a citizen’s identification in government registries. You have to admit, this is much more difficult than, say, asking a stranger to pose with a fake paper document, isn’t it?

[bubilas]

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

In the country where I live, there is also a similar method of confirmation through a banking application, and it is also done. Perhaps all these methods originate from a single idea implemented somewhere in very developed countries, but that's not the point. So I always use this method, because I know that it is the same reliable way as, for example, when you go through the login procedure through the Google button. Well, you know this method, when instead of entering a post and password (which you don't always remember), you just need to click on the button with the Google icon, and it will already do everything for you. I like such methods and I have nothing against it.