If KYC stays many lives will be lost in the future

[Lontor]

God bless Hester Peirce for even bringing this up, something that random people have been talking for few years now.
That KYC verification must go, enough is enough.

You can't say because you want to know who controls a Bitcoin address and not care about the dangers that comes with that.
Home invasion, Wrench attacks are growing up and it's looking like crypto chart 📈 ready to slowly keeps climbing.

This is the best thing that I have read online this year so far, finally someone in power sees it.
In the future hackers will prefer to look for data to go after people who holds Bitcoin,

This is not a joke, if you think it's impossible wait till Bitcoin reach 400k and counting.
The more valuable Bitcoin becomes and more it endagers your life.

KYC needs to Go.....



https://x.com/WatcherGuru/status/2103510145024069816

[BIT-BENDER]

This is just pandering tactics from the SEC commissioner manu exchanges that requires KYC are actually forced to do so, because trading on those exchanges requires Fiat currencies so I don't think it's just enough for the SEC commissioner to only just make statements he should make better plans for the actualization of what he claims.

Although there is still and option for decentralized exchanges, avoid KYC requiring Bitcoin related platform if you can and if that's what you want, but I won't just believe the SEC commissioner is doing enough.

[Ambatman]

Not bad
She isn't saying KYC or AML should be discontinued
But that data collected should be limited to what's necessary not sharing everything with an exchange.
At least she can see reasons that when a breach occur not one but thousands to millions of people lives would be affected.
Hence why she brought up ZKP to state one is eligible without giving too much.

[batang_bitcoin]

She in on point that sensitive data is only being collected for the creators of the databases of personal information and once they are hacked, it's no longer controllable and the data can be passed on to unknown people. Maybe we see the hope here that kyc will still be there but it will relax those requirements by the exchanges and other platforms who are pursuing the verification of their customers. It's really dangerous if the data of the masses gets on the wrong hands.

[Cookdata]

This is not a joke, if you think it's impossible wait till Bitcoin reach 400k and counting.
The more valuable Bitcoin becomes and more it endagers your life.

KYC needs to Go.....

https://x.com/WatcherGuru/status/2103510145024069816

You know what's worrying about KYC implementation, the purpose is being abused by companies that are using the AML policies for different kinds of scams. The first one is the mass collection of users data by companies without protecting users. They collect users data only to sell it to other companies. This same data is further sold to another party, and then the sales continue until a third party sell it to scammers, hackers and all sorts of people who use it for their benefit.

The dangerous ones are the exchange services. There is an anti-AML scam on the rise where the exchange asks you for proof of funds if your money passes through any mixer or protocol. We all know one of the purpose of mixers is for privacy reasons, but as soon as you receive a deposit from any privacy focus platform, they freeze your funds until you meet their demand, and if you fail to do so, your money is gone. They are stealing users funds under the guise of AML policies, they need to wind this down before we are left with zero privacy.

[Mrbluntzy]

They lied that the initiative of KYC is to put an end to internet fraund that is connected to Bitcoin and other cryoto, to put an end to money laundering but the reality now is that the rate of online fraund and theft is so high and their so call KYC is not able to even reduce the theft, neither did it stop money laundering, so their is need of having it when it is not solving the problem they claimed it was meant to solve, so it would be good they just stop which I doubt they will listen.

[promise444c5]

KYC can’t be completely erased though.. it’s needed in maybe some other aspect unless there’s something better to replace it..  Instead  it should be rephrased as KYC requirements for owning Bitcoin (not generalizing it )needs to be cancelled or reduced in a way that won’t affect those owning it.

Still don’t think that will be possible anyway.. it will still be the responsibility of everyone trying to own it  to figure out how they can without exposing much.

[Shadiq]

KYC may never be completely eliminated, but we can expect to see some changes. KYC is necessary to regulate P2P services on exchanges, otherwise the number of frauds will increase. Since customers will blame the exchanges for these frauds, exchanges require identification of the person.

KYC is not a big problem, but data theft has become a cause for concern. KYC definitely needs some relaxation so that personal information can be kept safe.

[Yablee0]

Basically, KYC can't be totally erased from the whole system because it's fundamental and it helps in keeping the system to be more functional and more transpareble to ensure proper accountability in every transactions. Her only worries is that the rate in which Bitcoin enthusiast is being targeted and harmed, is something that gives so much concern and needs urgent attention on how it can be combated. People are been attacked by the day once your details is with the wrong hand and this has been going on for long now. However, possible solution is needed to ensure the safety of various users accross nations because no live is worth to be cut short all in the name of answering an Bitcoin enthusiast.

[goldkingcoiner]

God bless Hester Peirce for even bringing this up, something that random people have been talking for few years now.
That KYC verification must go, enough is enough.

You can't say because you want to know who controls a Bitcoin address and not care about the dangers that comes with that.
Home invasion, Wrench attacks are growing up and it's looking like crypto chart 📈 ready to slowly keeps climbing.

This is the best thing that I have read online this year so far, finally someone in power sees it.
In the future hackers will prefer to look for data to go after people who holds Bitcoin,

This is not a joke, if you think it's impossible wait till Bitcoin reach 400k and counting.
The more valuable Bitcoin becomes and more it endagers your life.

KYC needs to Go.....



https://x.com/WatcherGuru/status/2103510145024069816

I agree and also I am very surprised that the SEC is actually saying something against KYC. I have not known them to be the spreaders of good news in the world of cryptocurrency...

People need to realize how important their KYC data is and what could happen if it falls into unknown hands...

I have always been anti-KYC.

[stompix]

You can't say because you want to know who controls a Bitcoin address and not care about the dangers that comes with that.
Home invasion, Wrench attacks are growing up and it's looking like crypto chart ready to slowly keeps climbing.

A tiny percentage of those actually happen because KYC leaks
Most causes are business partners, family giving away hints, the victim's job being related to crypto, his exposed wealth online and many others.

Not bad
She isn't saying KYC or AML should be discontinued
But that data collected should be limited to what's necessary not sharing everything with an exchange.

The only data that truly exposes you to an attack is the home address or proof of residence.
There is no way in hell any agency on this planet, including the FATF, will drop this from the requirements.

This is Pierce saying something again, trying to keep being relevant, no way this will ever be taken seriously by anyone in the SEC.

[Sunshine1525]

Not bad
She isn't saying KYC or AML should be discontinued
But that data collected should be limited to what's necessary not sharing everything with an exchange.
At least she can see reasons that when a breach occur not one but thousands to millions of people lives would be affected.
Hence why she brought up ZKP to state one is eligible without giving too much.

If that's the case then it not a bad idea cause i was thinking she was talking of discontinuing it, even though am not a big fan of KYC, i thought about the possibility of tracking criminals without KYC, people would steal money and clean it with Bitcoin without trace.

So if the data we submit for KYC is limited then it's a cool suggestion but she shouldn't just make a point but do everything within her capacity to make sure it's implemented.

[BABY SHOES]

I agree and also I am very surprised that the SEC is actually saying something against KYC. I have not known them to be the spreaders of good news in the world of cryptocurrency...

People need to realize how important their KYC data is and what could happen if it falls into unknown hands...

I have always been anti-KYC.

Against anti-KYC it's a lot...

Will the SEC's call for a mass KYC halt be accepted by other regulators? What about money laundering, will it decrease especially the data leaks that we often hear about?

I don't think the SEC is going to make much effort to do this, KYC collection for a platform will still be done... where there are money transactions there the government will know through KYC.

[denshin]

limiting what gets stored is the realistic part. most checks only need a yes or no, like over 18 or not on a sanctions list, not a full passport scan sitting on some server forever

[ColdLava40]

God bless Hester Peirce for even bringing this up, something that random people have been talking for few years now.
That KYC verification must go, enough is enough.

It’s a really good topic that should be up for discussion.

With the recent attacks on crypto investors, people should be more careful about KYC. We cannot completely avoid it, but we can avoid giving our personal data to every site that asks for it.

We don’t really know what the future holds, so we shouldn’t over exaggerate the situation either. Maybe there will be better data security protocols in place in the future to protect users. For now, people should focus on limiting how much personal information they put out there.

It only gets worse.

[knowngunman]

The only data that truly exposes you to an attack is the home address or proof of residence.
There is no way in hell any agency on this planet, including the FATF, will drop this from the requirements.

This is Pierce saying something again, trying to keep being relevant, no way this will ever be taken seriously by anyone in the SEC.

I can't agree less with this. Your residential address is what literally exposed one to physical attacks. It's more dangerous than online threats because you only lose your coin if you're threaten online but your life is at stake when you're being attacked physically.

Peirce knows that the global compliance system is built on this but she is free to say anything to remain relevant.
They should focus on how to improve the security of customers sensitive data instead of making unrealistic statements to gain public attention. They should keep the rule simple, if you don't have security mechanism to protect them, then you should never request for it.

[jossiel]

KYC may never be completely eliminated, but we can expect to see some changes. KYC is necessary to regulate P2P services on exchanges, otherwise the number of frauds will increase. Since customers will blame the exchanges for these frauds, exchanges require identification of the person.

KYC is not a big problem, but data theft has become a cause for concern. KYC definitely needs some relaxation so that personal information can be kept safe.

They have to modify which information for kyc they have to ask. There is no need for them to remove kyc wholly because it also helps when some hackers have mistakenly sent the hacked funds into these exchanges.

But they have to do something in order to minimize the risk of customers if ever their database has been hacked.

IMO, these platforms if their database are not encrypted then they have to start from there and cross out address where bad actors could go on each of users.

[Wiwo]

The bigger question is.

Will centralised exchange exist without kyc since is a mandatory requirement for them to get licensed.

Another thing is, individual Bitcoin wallet holders have the right to either go to a KYC compliance platform or make use of a fully decentralised one; it's up to them to choose which fits them the most.

[Findingnemo]

I doubt they will drop the mandatory KYC requirements, they still want to track down to every last penny for sure and maybe this is to propose a different way of collecting and managing the data. I have no idea how they handle the data but at least it some come up with some kind of encryption that put the data to be useless if someone hacks it in the middle.

I think it is very much possible to do that.

[TheButterZone]

Have your BTC stolen by a hack, or get murdered after a KYC leak? Exchanges are grrrreat!