If KYC stays many lives will be lost in the future

[Dizciple]

It is quite striking to see statements like this. Yes, KYC essentially forces us to compromise our own privacy. We are dealing with platforms that are supposed to be decentralized, yet KYC is mandated. It is actually a rather "funny and strange" situation. But, many national regulations currently require KYC and AML measures, ostensibly to combat money laundering and the like.

Decentralized exchanges shouldn't be forced to make use of KYC because when they're being forced then it isn't showing the strength and purpose of those exchanges. Centralized exchanges are permitted to ask for kyc because they don't say that they're decentralized but those that claim to be decentralized but still asked for kyc are the ones that worries me because they're making it look like, investors can't buy and sell in the market anymore without being asked to verify their information  KYC isn't 100% the right tool to fight money laundering therefore it doesn't make that much difference when we ask everyone to do it before they can trade. There are still ways of getting your hands on fake KYC and scammers are still making use of them to avoid getting caught. KYC only affects the small traders as they get restricted from trading when they're from a country that has been prohibited but this shouldn't be what's encouraged as the market isn't supposed to discriminate against people because everyone is suppose to be welcomed to trade Bitcoin.

[laijsica]

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

Wow yeah this is crazy. This is the first I am reading this just now and ive got to say that I really like that he said this! Ive seen this argument a lot and its hard not to ignore that KYC info could most definitely be used against the holder especially by force

It can be used against the holder and security will be greatly compromised when the price of Bitcoin skyrockets or it can be at the present time. Information can be stolen from exchanges but the problem is who can I trust without KYC verification where I will be holding thousands of dollars of assets. Centralized exchanges provide us with immediate support and they have gained a lot of customer trust yet there is a possibility of our information being stolen. The scope for escape is narrow because many of us cannot trust exchanges without KYC verification.

[hd49728]

It can be used against the holder and security will be greatly compromised when the price of Bitcoin skyrockets or it can be at the present time. Information can be stolen from exchanges but the problem is who can I trust without KYC verification where I will be holding thousands of dollars of assets. Centralized exchanges provide us with immediate support and they have gained a lot of customer trust yet there is a possibility of our information being stolen. The scope for escape is narrow because many of us cannot trust exchanges without KYC verification.

KYC is dangerous for individual users to business company owners and latest data leak from Curacao is a big lesson.
Curaçao gaming authority experienced unauthorized access to their portal.

I don't know hackers, either white hat hackers or black hat hackers, will use such data for ransom attacks to individuals but there is possibility and risk for such. While with casino owners and team members, they have higher risk to be attacked and asked for ransom money.

KYC is truly risky and useless for everyone, it's only helpful for governments and hackers.

I disagree with a reason of doing KYC to avoid or reduce scams. People must be responsible for their knowledge, preparation, carefulness and actions so that scam or not, it fully depends on them, not KYC.

[Peanutswar]

We've been suffering with this data leak and data breaches from the platforms we are keep using which mandates us to submit a KYC, we keep pushing anonymity with the cryptocurrency but these centralized platform requires it before using their services, but recently base on my observation people getting enlighten with the privacy so others wanted to keep transact out of the hand into these centralized platforms.

[...]
For sure when the market price of Bitcoin skyrocket, there will be even more attacks, wrech attack, hacking etc. for sure is going to be a huge thing, I mean atleast have the choice of not giving all of the data since I think It was always going to be some kind of information needed.

Every time ive seen the bull run there is a lot of attacks and crimes committed related into cryptocurrency this is the reason it's an essential to have an importance of privacy, security and become vigilant these days.

[Somegory]

KYC is only helpful for people who are running the platform and somehow the government itself, it's sad that this data leaks will become a bigger problem if something is not done about it, this can't keep going on.

Also I believe it's time for people to rethink about where they are buying their coins, maybe just maybe this will be the time where everyone will march to decentralised exchanges and abandoned Cex for good.

From now on I will change my view about KYC verification, I have never feel this way about passing KYC verification until today, I don't like it and I will never.

[OcTradism]

KYC is only helpful for people who are running the platform and somehow the government itself, it's sad that this data leaks will become a bigger problem if something is not done about it, this can't keep going on.

If you can not change the governments, you must adapt to what they enforce on you, and consequently you will have less choices for no KYC trades and platforms. You will have more difficulty to find no KYC platforms to use but it's all you can do for KYC adaptation.

Until a time you can have a politician, a party that have their propaganda as no KYC but honestly I don't see any government in the future will support no KYC. When there is no choice like that in your nation, you can not vote KYC government and politicians out of their power.

From now on I will change my view about KYC verification, I have never feel this way about passing KYC verification until today, I don't like it and I will never.

If you already did KYC one some platforms before, this mean your documents are stored somewhere and perhaps will be leaked in the future. You can change your practice from now with challenge I mentioned, but you can not completely erase your identity and documents which were submitted a long time ago.

[Kalchef]

Data leaks is what needs to go, not KYC itself, because the truth is online casinos and exchanges for crypto can't run without KYC verification, what many don't know is that KYC verification has lead to many arrests of bad actors.

Killing KYC completely will open door to more numbers of criminals online so don't even dream about that, it's never going to come to past, all we can hope for is a more secured way to avoid data leakages.

This isn't the case some years back but today it's happening because of AI capabilities, which in theory isn't that bad, if not for AI these platforms won't even know that they have weak security issues all this while.

[arwin100]

KYC is only helpful for people who are running the platform and somehow the government itself, it's sad that this data leaks will become a bigger problem if something is not done about it, this can't keep going on.

If you can not change the governments, you must adapt to what they enforce on you, and consequently you will have less choices for no KYC trades and platforms. You will have more difficulty to find no KYC platforms to use but it's all you can do for KYC adaptation.

Until a time you can have a politician, a party that have their propaganda as no KYC but honestly I don't see any government in the future will support no KYC. When there is no choice like that in your nation, you can not vote KYC government and politicians out of their power.

This is actually the reality that we are been force to adopt, since that regulation gives us less options. Then nothing left for us, but to adopt what they want to imposed.

Government will not going to support No KYC matters, because this is how they are tracking the platform and people doing any transactions online.

I understand the concern of people about the risk of KYC. But government usually ignore this, because they give more weights on what they think can more beneficial to them.

[Z-tight]

Killing KYC completely will open door to more numbers of criminals online so don't even dream about that, it's never going to come to past, all we can hope for is a more secured way to avoid data leakages.

Yeah, there cannot be a complete end to kyc and aml policies and that is not even what Hester Peirce was advocating for. She never called for an end to kyc, but an end to the current method by which it is applied or enforced.

The truth is that kyc is very dangerous and the more people submit personal data to different services, the higher the chances that it could eventually fall into the hands of bad actors. So, if there is a way that people can be verified without having to hand over all their sensitive personal data to any service, then it should be explored.

ZK proofs is one method that was suggested, and many more could be developed and tested over the years, to find something that is safe and works well.

[Ashawowo(OS)]

I don't know hackers, either white hat hackers or black hat hackers, will use such data for ransom attacks to individuals but there is possibility and risk for such. While with casino owners and team members, they have higher risk to be attacked and asked for ransom money.

I would want to clarify that while hat hackers don't attempt accessing a system without proper authorization, those who try to gain illegal access are gray and black hat hackers but those who really exploit systems are the black hat hackers and they're the ones that steals funds, data and other valuables and sometimes sells those data to the black market or do other illegal things with them.

I disagree with a reason of doing KYC to avoid or reduce scams. People must be responsible for their knowledge, preparation, carefulness and actions so that scam or not, it fully depends on them, not KYC.

KYC is for control and tracking people's activities, AML policies is only an excuse to enforce KYC. Even with KYC, scams and hack still happen repeatedly, so what's the need? People should intentionally chose decentralized and NO KYC services for their own safety, privacy and security.

[Luzin]

Even with KYC, scams and hack still happen repeatedly, so what's the need? People should intentionally chose decentralized and NO KYC services for their own safety, privacy and security.

KYC is one way to prevent, not eliminate, hacking or theft cases. KYC is just one effort, not a guarantee without weaknesses. So, exploiting weaknesses might not be an issue with KYC itself, but rather could be a security system problem. They implement KYC because they understand it's a rule and they have to comply with that rule, otherwise, their business license surely won't be issued. It's possible to choose not to do KYC, and there are still providers that allow it, though there could be other consequences.

Everyone thinks about various risks, including whether to choose KYC or not. Most big exchanges operating these days require KYC. So indirectly, they kind of force you to do KYC. That's because it's the rule in the jurisdiction of a certain continent or country. IMO