If KYC stays many lives will be lost in the future

[Smartprofit]

KYC is evil, and yet it's our current reality. 🙋

I still remember a world in which Swiss banks guaranteed the secrecy of their clients' bank deposits. Then, information was provided selectively (upon request from law enforcement agencies). And now we're moving toward complete transparency of all financial flows and the introduction of central bank digital currencies.

I see this as more than just a fight against fraudsters... Governments, in alliance with tech corporations, want to completely control people's every thought and action. I'm deeply afraid that this is happening because governments have nothing to offer people except a place in a digital concentration camp. Governments want to know everything about people and control them completely, and in exchange, they might be willing to provide them with a universal basic income (in exchange for complete obedience). Or maybe not...

For Bitcoin, this state of affairs is catastrophic, since its blockchain is inherently transparent.  Satoshi Nakamoto likely never imagined that people would voluntarily disclose their Bitcoin ownership and storage addresses to authorities. He might also have been surprised by the capabilities of modern analytics software.

Of course, it's good that the SEC commissioner is calling for limiting the number of documents required for KYC. But that doesn't change the fact that KYC and AML are destroying the Bitcoin we knew and loved. It will be a completely different financial asset. 🤷

[X-ray]

Interestingly the caller isn't calling for a total stop to KYC but just a reduction to the level of data information these centralize platforms requests from their customers. If they're are really concerned by the dangers the KYC is causing them the right call should have being for total abolishment. The government through these platforms creates a social mental construct that makes it logical for them to invade people's privacy while they're not putting in the every effort to ensure those information are confidentially safe from leak of cyber breach.

If people's privacy can't be protected then there's no use demanding for it as part of operational policy when technically no one gets prosecuted when damage these information are exposed and damage is done.

Abolishing KYC completely would make them unable to trace ownership of asset and they won't be able to enforce AML.

Even though we want complete privacy and no KYC services but government simply don't want that for tax collection purposes as well.

Even the Crypto mom draw the line where privacy stopped being priority.

But at the very least by having minimal data collection or replacing it completely with zk proof, we have less to worry about.

Maybe eventually in the future when things are advanced enough, we can abolish KYC completely, but it's definitely one step at a time.

[Abiky]

KYC is created to avoid scammers from entering any platform or fakes one. The only problem is the platform security to protect these information cause once an attack happened these data arent safe and falling to the hands of a scammer means a bigger trouble.

Maybe they dont want that to happen thats why the statement is in support to limit the data which I believe is right and better since less information less danger to anyone stake.

To avoid scammers or bots? Because even scammers forge fake IDs and documents to pass the KYC verification test. It's easy to fool centralized exchanges and/or services these days. What makes customers vulnerable from KYC is the way it's structured (centralized). Putting all personal data on a single server brings the risk of a single point of failure. That's why crypto was made to work without middlemen. But putting centralized players on top of it (CEXs, companies, custodial wallets), greatly defeats its purpose.

YC is more of a "bug" than a feature to me. Governments make use of this to help track crypto users. It all comes down at the cost of minimal privacy and higher ID theft. The only solution would be to let governments enforce KYC directly instead of companies. It would avoid many headaches. Just my two sats.

[cryptoaddictchie]

Governments make use of this to help track crypto users. It all comes down at the cost of minimal privacy and higher ID theft. The only solution would be to let governments enforce KYC directly instead of companies. It would avoid many headaches. Just my two sats.

I think Governments have already been doing KYC for us since then from different kind of identity data and information like Birth certificate, Tax record, and any type of affiliated identity related to users has been asked by them since then. The only thing is the linking of these identity to the crypto users which most Government doesnt have yet at least what I knee from our country. Appteciate the insight fam!

[lovesmayfamilis]

Governments make use of this to help track crypto users. It all comes down at the cost of minimal privacy and higher ID theft. The only solution would be to let governments enforce KYC directly instead of companies. It would avoid many headaches. Just my two sats.

I think Governments have already been doing KYC for us since then from different kind of identity data and information like Birth certificate, Tax record, and any type of affiliated identity related to users has been asked by them since then. The only thing is the linking of these identity to the crypto users which most Government doesnt have yet at least what I knee from our country. Appteciate the insight fam!

Right. And hardly anyone will refuse to receive such data as information about the owners of wallets and the amount of funds stored on them. Some countries restrict the use of bitcoin, justifying concern for the population and citing numerous cases of theft, loss and fraud, but they forget that today hacking of any sites storing customer information occurs with "enviable" regularity. It is completely unclear what exactly this concern for people is, if documents are required everywhere.

[Jasmyne]

KYC is created to avoid scammers from entering any platform or fakes one. The only problem is the platform security to protect these information cause once an attack happened these data arent safe and falling to the hands of a scammer means a bigger trouble.

Maybe they dont want that to happen thats why the statement is in support to limit the data which I believe is right and better since less information less danger to anyone stake.

To my understanding, most platforms actually go as far as protecting their customer’s information when KYC is provided from scammers but at the end some still fall victims of scam and their customers informations get leaked.
At this point already, I will say KYC verification is very vital to this platform’s in order to regulate most activity and confirm identity but it is still not enough since scammers still forge ID for KYC verification and also at the rate of how personal informations are been disclosed to scammers through their platform when an attack happens, it is also important to regulate the kind of information been ask during KYC verification.

[Ashawowo(OS)]

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.

Now with the Advent of data leaks and agencies holding users data becoming a target for hackers, do you think KYC is still fulfilling that task of preventing scams?
What I can see is it aiding them to come to pass. Your leaked data gets to the black market, your security and privacy is already compromised and you're a direct target for scam, theft, impersonation or even blackmail. It's obvious KYC have failed, but the government would always give excuses and hold on to it because it's their greatest tool of control. Instead of reducing KYC requirements to the barest minimum for people's safety, they're expanding it's scope which puts people even in greater futuristic danger.

[cryptoaddictchie]

Some countries restrict the use of bitcoin, justifying concern for the population and citing numerous cases of theft, loss and fraud, but they forget that today hacking of any sites storing customer information occurs with "enviable" regularity. It is completely unclear what exactly this concern for people is, if documents are required everywhere.

Which countries are those that restrict bitcoin? Deym thats so harsh!  Honestly Ive been wondering if these private cex or any platform will give up our data once a Government entity ask for it secretly or maybe it does happened already but quietly. I understand that this must be done for some suspicious or potential scammers to help identify them but not to the point that they will surrender our information just because they asked.

[Akaenyi]

With the increasing rate of hacks I believe that concerns for the safekeep of our private information have become paramount, centralized platforms are being hacked like it is almost a normal thing so if platforms can ease the information that is required during KYC verifications the better for us. I guess that KYC cannot be totally avoided for obvious reasons but both the government and platforms have to understand that hackers are becoming more sophisticated which is a problem for us that have our private information in database which we don't control.

I also share the fear that if Bitcoin increases to the rate of a couple of hundreds of dollars that targets would rapidly increase because criminals will be desperate to connive with hackers to get leaked data and specifically target crypto holders of their choice.

[Z_MBFM]

With the increasing rate of hacks I believe that concerns for the safekeep of our private information have become paramount, centralized platforms are being hacked like it is almost a normal thing so if platforms can ease the information that is required during KYC verifications the better for us. I guess that KYC cannot be totally avoided for obvious reasons but both the government and platforms have to understand that hackers are becoming more sophisticated which is a problem for us that have our private information in database which we don't control.

I also share the fear that if Bitcoin increases to the rate of a couple of hundreds of dollars that targets would rapidly increase because criminals will be desperate to connive with hackers to get leaked data and specifically target crypto holders of their choice.

Centralized platforms are legally doing a finance related business so knowing the user's identity is also very important for them. Kyc documents are also very important for recovering a user's account if it is hacked because there may be enough funds there so it is their responsibility to transfer the account to a legitimate owner. Considering these aspects, the issue of kyc cannot be ignored in centralized platforms. And when you think about holding and holding, why would you use a centralized platform. Then definitely use a decentralized platform as you will not have to submit any kind of personal document and your privacy will be maintained.
Centralized platforms are getting hacked from time to time and this will continue to happen because no matter how much the security of the platform is increased, hackers will also get smarter day by day. However, every investor should be careful from all sides and should not click on any kind of phishing link. This is the personal responsibility of each individual.

[Dogedegen]

It is a comparison of how valuable data is as new gold and oil. And that explains what you have explained, millions of people who have complied with it and knowing that it's been leaked and got into the hands of unknown, they can market it and up for sale in the illegal marketplaces. Then, that comes next with what you have said about doing such attacks to the victims. It's a variety of issue that lies within the kyc and every single person who's got their data in the wrong people can simply lead to many dangerous acts that can be done to them directly or indirectly.

I repeat again you can't talk in generals like that like data is valuable. Most data has very low value, don't just say what you read on news websites and then repeat it here. I read that data is the new gold and oil too in the past, but it has no relevance to this topic. Personal data is very cheap because it is leaking all the time from many platforms. There is only one point of the data that can be considered important here and that is the relation to the crypto holdings, even that data you can't really call valuable because it does not have a high market value. The value comes from the knowledge that you can attack this kind of person, not from a direct kind of market value so it is much more abstract. We don't have a way to even put that in a real number.

Kyc documents are also very important for recovering a user's account if it is hacked because there may be enough funds there so it is their responsibility to transfer the account to a legitimate owner.

This is not true at all, in most cases of hacks the money is gone. Having KYC does not help get you the money back, it is not possible to get it back this way. Don't give benefits to KYC that are not there, it would be better if exchanges operated without any KYC.

[PVequalNRT]

Governments make use of this to help track crypto users. It all comes down at the cost of minimal privacy and higher ID theft. The only solution would be to let governments enforce KYC directly instead of companies. It would avoid many headaches. Just my two sats.

I think Governments have already been doing KYC for us since then from different kind of identity data and information like Birth certificate, Tax record, and any type of affiliated identity related to users has been asked by them since then. The only thing is the linking of these identity to the crypto users which most Government doesnt have yet at least what I knee from our country. Appteciate the insight fam!

The government has been doing Kyc right from date of birth because certificates are issues and record are kept on the hospital and good thing about government institution is that even though they get hack due to low security, you can never see the government selling users information. Everything the government has about people are confidential, you can lose your job if you play with people's privacy.

The mistake of the governments is that they think the way they don't play with people's confidentiality is the way companies are going to handle customers data. Users data has turned into large business for many companies today that I don't think kyc purpose still remain relevant.

[TastyChillySauce00]

KYC is created to avoid scammers from entering any platform or fakes one. The only problem is the platform security to protect these information cause once an attack happened these data arent safe and falling to the hands of a scammer means a bigger trouble.

Maybe they dont want that to happen thats why the statement is in support to limit the data which I believe is right and better since less information less danger to anyone stake.

To avoid scammers or bots? Because even scammers forge fake IDs and documents to pass the KYC verification test. It's easy to fool centralized exchanges and/or services these days. What makes customers vulnerable from KYC is the way it's structured (centralized). Putting all personal data on a single server brings the risk of a single point of failure. That's why crypto was made to work without middlemen. But putting centralized players on top of it (CEXs, companies, custodial wallets), greatly defeats its purpose.

YC is more of a "bug" than a feature to me. Governments make use of this to help track crypto users. It all comes down at the cost of minimal privacy and higher ID theft. The only solution would be to let governments enforce KYC directly instead of companies. It would avoid many headaches. Just my two sats.

I was under the impression that there is no way scammers can forge fake IDs and documents to pass the KYC verification and it shouldn't be that easy. Apparently it's a real thing according to this news, Web fraud enters a new age as complete 'synthetic identities' can now be bought for as little as $200 on dark web marketplaces.

Basically we the normal people get to risk our identity by doing real identity verification while scammers can forge identity and don't even worry about their id getting leaked. Crazy honestly. More reason why KYC isn't really to avoid scammers and instead putting our lives in danger.

[Fordsmith]

This is the part of the KYC debate that deserves more attention. Financial transparency has value, but exposing who owns valuable assets can create a very different kind of risk.

[cryptoaddictchie]

I was under the impression that there is no way scammers can forge fake IDs and documents to pass the KYC verification and it shouldn't be that easy. Apparently it's a real thing according to this news, Web fraud enters a new age as complete 'synthetic identities' can now be bought for as little as $200 on dark web marketplaces.

Basically we the normal people get to risk our identity by doing real identity verification while scammers can forge identity and don't even worry about their id getting leaked. Crazy honestly. More reason why KYC isn't really to avoid scammers and instead putting our lives in danger.

Well before they can however with the higher standard now these guys cant do it. Aside from submission of fake IDs or document, platform now have secondary confirmation like selfie and video proof or actual verification of the users biometrics before even being approved and if they still cautious probably another layer of verification is present besides that. Live verification isnt easy to forge or to overcome unless their devs that can magically makes your face the same with the fake IDs.

[The Cryptovator]

I think so. KYC would hurt our assets, or even it would hurt our lives as well. I haven’t shared the story yet, but a few days back I received a physical letter about FTX recovery, where even I hadn’t had an account there. I haven’t even read documentation yet because I know it’s a scam attempt. I shouldn’t receive it, but the address was something else that came from where.

It would be better if the crypto platform stopped asking for KYC. Legal authorities also realize the potential risk of the user. There should be some other alternative to monitoring the crypto platform by the legal authorities.

[TedMosby]

It doesn't look like they are against KYC or AML. I think it's more like they are against the way KYC is processed nowadays, like collecting sensitive data. The more services we use that need KYC, the more databases will be created.

Our sensitive data may be part of the database of bank A, bank B, exchange A, exchange B, marketplace A, marketplace B. And unfortunately, these companies have different levels of security. Your data might be safe from an exchange hack, but what about the other services you use? It may already be compromised without you knowing it.

I still stand by my belief that KYC is not something we should avoid. It comes with good and bad things. It's good for fighting against money laundering and other types of crimes. But the tradeoff is what I already mentioned above.

Even if ZK is used, it doesn't mean your data is safe, especially when the ZK backend process still relies on a centralized authority running on a centralized cloud, like AWS and the like. It's more like decentralized outside, centralized inside.

But disclaimer, I might be wrong about this, so CMIIW.

[As-Soon-As]

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

Yes Bitcoin KYC is a big danger waiting in the future, those who buy and sell Bitcoin on exchanges and some people who hold Bitcoins there KYC is not enough, but they force them to do KYC. From here hackers can easily find the owners of Bitcoins, and after finding them, they can definitely kidnap them. And through this kidnapping they can forge all the Bitcoins they are holding, if Bitcoin is good in privacy then why is KYC needed?
So we must stay away from KYC, so everyone must be careful on their own and stay safe.

[Muba20]

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.

Because of the government's KYC policy, people's important information now goes to online platforms. Where all the assets of an investor are kept. When people choose assets like Bitcoin to keep their identity secret, the government also opens up the issue of keeping that secret due to the obligation of KYC. If scammers get people's personal information even if the government doesn't want it, then of course those people are not safe. In some cases, KYC data can be stolen and someone from the relevant authority can share it with others in exchange for money. It may also be that no one knows but that information has been stolen.

If governments want to provide real security to people and play a role in saving their lives, then they should definitely stop doing KYC, otherwise the people of the country become completely insecure, especially as Bitcoin becomes more expensive, scammers will become more aggressive. In the meantime, we are seeing that the number of wrench attacks is increasing, which will lead to more terrorist activities in the future. It will be difficult for the government to provide security to the people. Hester Peirce has highlighted the truth that this will happen in reality, but those who do not believe this are instead lying to the public.

[L E G E N D A R Y]

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.

Now with the Advent of data leaks and agencies holding users data becoming a target for hackers, do you think KYC is still fulfilling that task of preventing scams?
What I can see is it aiding them to come to pass. Your leaked data gets to the black market, your security and privacy is already compromised and you're a direct target for scam, theft, impersonation or even blackmail. It's obvious KYC have failed, but the government would always give excuses and hold on to it because it's their greatest tool of control. Instead of reducing KYC requirements to the barest minimum for people's safety, they're expanding it's scope which puts people even in greater futuristic danger.

KYC on its own doesn’t necessarily prevent scams you know, what it basically does is to give platforms a way that they can use to identify and also have a lead on users should incase something goes wrong. But another angle to look at it is what really happens when the information collect suddenly becomes a liability after a breach. Just because an organization collects more personal information doesn’t automatically mean that they have better security, especially when the organization holding these data lacks the ability to properly protect them, then it becomes a real problem for them.