eXch - instant exchange BTC / LN / XMR / LTC / ETH / ERC20

[Synchronice]

Those who have been in this for a long time have surely noticed that they are trying to boil us like a frog (someone mentioned it recently) in other words very slowly until it is too late.

Slightly off-topic, but that frog in hot water analogy has always been wrong. The frog will in fact jump out of the boiling water no matter how slowly it is heated. Which shows they may be smarter than us as humans tend to adjust to uncomfortable situations until it is too difficult to get out of.

That frog example is false but the narrative of that example is applicable to everyone. We and frogs also, don't notice changes immediately but then there is a second when you sense that something is wrong and that's the moment when the frog jumps out.
Animals follow their instincts, humans have a brain and can decide between an instinct and what they need to do. We, humans, lack unity, that's why so many people live in bad conditions and that's why so many jobs pay low and enslave workers.

There will always be a grey economy and straight-up black markets.

Of course, those markets are created with the help of governments. Make no mistake, governments know who to catch and when to catch. It's just a matter of fact what they want. CIA involvement in Contra cocaine trafficking

[dkbit98]

They don't even have to "guarantee" anything:  the ones who earn from selling the notion of taint are the ones who make up which coin is good or bad. It makes perfect sense that their customers get a clean slate.

Most exchanges would probably never look for tainted coins if governments didn't force them and make ultimatum.
That is why I would say that governments originally started selling this notion of taint.

Even the most hardcore taint-believers and bullshit sellers know that there will never be a world where everyone who engages with bitcoin will do so under their terms (in centralized and controllable environments).

Just imagine what would happen if Bitcoin introduced privacy on-chain, all this talk would be irrelevant.
It's not to late to option privacy, maybe with mweb, but I already see some services don't accept coins from litecoin mweb addresses. 

[examplens]

They don't even have to "guarantee" anything:  the ones who earn from selling the notion of taint are the ones who make up which coin is good or bad. It makes perfect sense that their customers get a clean slate.

Most exchanges would probably never look for tainted coins if governments didn't force them and make ultimatum.
That is why I would say that governments originally started selling this notion of taint.

Occasional examples of punishment, such as the eXch case, push other exchanges to take shelter in the 'safe' zone. So they still decide on AML and tainted game. In the end, ignoring AML checks and results will bring them a negative mark, and the coins coming from them will be marked as tainted.
Things are going in the wrong direction, honestly, I don't even see any final solution that would stop this coin marking.

[LoyceV]

Just imagine what would happen if Bitcoin introduced privacy on-chain, all this talk would be irrelevant.

I imagine governments would quickly make it disappear from all centralized compliant exchanges. ETFs may survive this, but Bitcoin as we know it will be gone. I like the development of on-chain privacy features, but I don't think it can ever become the default mode in Bitcoin.

It's not to late to option privacy, maybe with mweb, but I already see some services don't accept coins from litecoin mweb addresses.

What good does privacy do, if it makes you a suspect for using it? The real change has to come from voting, but as most people are happy telling themselves "I don't have anything to hide", it's not going to matter.

[Pmalek]

Just imagine what would happen if Bitcoin introduced privacy on-chain, all this talk would be irrelevant.
It's not to late to option privacy, maybe with mweb, but I already see some services don't accept coins from litecoin mweb addresses. 

I wouldn't like it because it would bring a whole set of new problems to Bitcoin. You would see delistings happening all over the place like with monero. Bitcoin would fall under more scrutiny than monero because of its popularity and larger userbase. It would give the enemies of everything Bitcoin stands for new justifications to go after its users. I don't think Bitcoin would ever have become this popular if it had protocol-level privacy instead of a public blockchain. 

[s8n]

It took me a while, but eventually, I too came to the realization that, in hindsight, the eXch service was indeed absolutely unethical. Many will disagree, but there is just no point in denying it. You cannot provide such an exceptional service and then vanish into oblivion. I have tested a few other services – none came close in terms of service, credibility, or trustworthiness. Shame on you! You spoiled us.

I also find many posts in this thread irritating. How often do we need to remind you that you are not entitled to privacy? KYC is just for your own good. Forcing an exchange to shut down over a handful of malicious actors is a classic move in our book. It is not as if an entire population has not been nuked twice over their regime. Gotta love collective punishment!

[_act_]

It took me a while, but eventually, I too came to the realization that, in hindsight, the eXch service was indeed absolutely unethical. Many will disagree, but there is just no point in denying it. You cannot provide such an exceptional service and then vanish into oblivion. I have tested a few other services – none came close in terms of service, credibility, or trustworthiness. Shame on you! You spoiled us.

I also find many posts in this thread irritating. How often do we need to remind you that you are not entitled to privacy? KYC is just for your own good. Forcing an exchange to shut down over a handful of malicious actors is a classic move in our book. It is not as if an entire population has not been nuked twice over their regime. Gotta love collective punishment!

Is that the reason Lazarus group was successfully also able to launder almost the same amount (that put exch into trouble) through OKX aggregator?

Also know that there are still other exchanges that are not requiring KYC.

With almost everything about fiat that has KYC, did you know that United Nations Office on Drugs and Crime (UNODC) estimates that up to $5.54 trillion was laundered in 2024? That is around 5% of global GDP.

Money laundering remains one of the most pervasive financial crimes worldwide, enabling criminal organizations to legitimize illicit funds. According to estimates from the United Nations Office on Drugs and Crime (UNODC), around 2% to 5% of the world’s GDP is laundered each year. In 2024, this equated to a staggering USD 2.22 trillion to USD 5.54 trillion flowing through the global financial system undetected. Despite aggressive regulatory measures, law enforcement agencies recover only a small fraction of these illicit transactions.

[Bitcoin_Arena]

It took me a while, but eventually, I too came to the realization that, in hindsight, the eXch service was indeed absolutely unethical. Many will disagree, but there is just no point in denying it. You cannot provide such an exceptional service and then vanish into oblivion. I have tested a few other services – none came close in terms of service, credibility, or trustworthiness. Shame on you! You spoiled us.

I also find many posts in this thread irritating. How often do we need to remind you that you are not entitled to privacy? KYC is just for your own good. Forcing an exchange to shut down over a handful of malicious actors is a classic move in our book. It is not as if an entire population has not been nuked twice over their regime. Gotta love collective punishment!

The witch hunt was the real mission from the word go! How dare they deny their users KYC verification? How dare they refuse to user funds and provide user details to sneaky Government officials?

In the fight against Government intrusion, it can go two ways, either resist till you get caught and end up compromising others users or bow out honorably and live another day to fight but do not give in to the Government demands.

[NotATether]

It took me a while, but eventually, I too came to the realization that, in hindsight, the eXch service was indeed absolutely unethical. Many will disagree, but there is just no point in denying it. You cannot provide such an exceptional service and then vanish into oblivion. I have tested a few other services – none came close in terms of service, credibility, or trustworthiness. Shame on you! You spoiled us.

Oh I totally agree agree with you. Ever since eXch stonewalled me for almost a month when I was trying to get my affiliate payouts - I did get my money eventually but they banned me from the program (and they made a public spectacle of it) -  I always had this worry that this sort of stubbornness which I found resembling that of Samourai's devs would lead to their downfall eventually.

Sadly I was proven right, but maybe things would've ended differently for them if they were a little more compromising.

I also find many posts in this thread irritating. How often do we need to remind you that you are not entitled to privacy? KYC is just for your own good.

OK, let me tell you a story that happened recently.

I run Talksearch, a search engine for Bitcointalk, and back when the indexing servers were still hosted on Google Cloud, I went to go pay the invoice by loading my linked PayWithUs card. Well at the cryptomus checkout page, after making the transaction I realized that I had sent them money I received from OKmix (directly, from their telegram contact, as a payment for services delivered to my other website, the BitMixList mixer directory), and the payment to Cryptomus was blocked.

Well I said OK, let me send them clean LTC that I obtained from Wizardswap - blocked too.

To "refund" (they would not allow the deposits to go through), they wanted detailed information about the transactions.

Unfortunately I had deleted the Wizardswap exchange details a couple of days prior, so no details available for that one.

So I was thinking OK let me just send them my correspondence with OKmix but of course I know that my service providers do not like my directory service and find it risky.

So if they see anything related to mixers then they will just demand additional information even though it's not connected to the other service I was trying to fund. So to be clear, I never sent them any details. It was not even a lot of money anyway (2x $100), no big deal now that payment processors are trying to play judge.

Or is it??

Would you like to be demanded for your ID and utility bill when using a POS terminal at any store? I'm not talking about regulated industries like weapons and bars, but ANY store. Like Walmart. Or an Apple Store.

No? Ok, well we have our answer then.

I wouldn't like to be demanded for such information either.

Now a legit service has lost my business because their payment processor does not want me as a customer. Do you think it's fair for them?

KYC is a required part of applying for banks, loans, and debit cards (even online). That does not mean we should make it mandatory for all types of payments just because it's crypto.

*edited for spelling

[LoyceV]

You cannot provide such an exceptional service and then vanish into oblivion.

That's the only way after offering an exceptional privacy service.

Now a legit service has lost my business because their payment processor does not want me as a customer.

I can't even find an office address for that payment provider. Only email, WhatsApp, Telegram or Discord. That doesn't sound like a company I'd trust with my personal details.

[joker_josue]

KYC is a required part of applying for banks, loans, and debit cards (even online). That does not mean we should make it mandatory for all types of payments just because it's crypto.

Something similar has happened to me. It doesn't make any sense, this level of demand for everyone and some products/services.

These platforms go much further than the laws say. The worst thing is that more and more of these "problems" will arise. This type of attitude will only make people look for alternative solutions, outside the system. Almost forcing them to do illegal things, when they don't want to.

[examplens]

KYC is a required part of applying for banks, loans, and debit cards (even online). That does not mean we should make it mandatory for all types of payments just because it's crypto.

The only reason why anyone gives themselves the right to demand KYC and source of funds is because of the simplicity of blocking crypto funds. At the same time, the user does not have many options for appeal or other action against such behavior. Especially when 'smaller' amounts are involved, like your case.

[s8n]

Is that the reason Lazarus group was successfully also able to launder almost the same amount (that put exch into trouble) through OKX aggregator?

Also know that there are still other exchanges that are not requiring KYC.

With almost everything about fiat that has KYC, did you know that United Nations Office on Drugs and Crime (UNODC) estimates that up to $5.54 trillion was laundered in 2024? That is around 5% of global GDP.

Money laundering remains one of the most pervasive financial crimes worldwide, enabling criminal organizations to legitimize illicit funds. According to estimates from the United Nations Office on Drugs and Crime (UNODC), around 2% to 5% of the world’s GDP is laundered each year. In 2024, this equated to a staggering USD 2.22 trillion to USD 5.54 trillion flowing through the global financial system undetected. Despite aggressive regulatory measures, law enforcement agencies recover only a small fraction of these illicit transactions.

I do not disagree at all – after all, that was what I had meant. Malicious actors will always find a way. I certainly believe it will take a few more years for many to fully comprehend that the only winners in KYC are institutions and actors interested in your data. While you hurt the 'shenanigans' in a way, the definitive loser has always been, and will always be, the ordinary, law-abiding citizen. In fact, KYC might even be used as a reason by some to collect and save customer data. But... if a data breach happens, whoopsie, sorry for that, hehe. Butterfingers!

Could not have said it better:

The only reason why anyone gives themselves the right to demand KYC and source of funds is because of the simplicity of blocking crypto funds. At the same time, the user does not have many options for appeal or other action against such behavior. Especially when 'smaller' amounts are involved, like your case.

The witch hunt was the real mission from the word go! How dare they deny their users KYC verification? How dare they refuse to user funds and provide user details to sneaky Government officials?

In the fight against Government intrusion, it can go two ways, either resist till you get caught and end up compromising others users or bow out honorably and live another day to fight but do not give in to the Government demands.

You either die a hero, or you live long enough to see yourself become the villain...

Oh I totally agree agree with you. Ever since eXch stonewalled me for almost a month when I was trying to get my affiliate payouts - I did get my money eventually but they banned me from the program (and they made a public spectacle of it) -  I always had this worry that this sort of stubbornness which I found resembling that of Samourai's devs would lead to their downfall eventually.

Sadly I was proven right, but maybe things would've ended differently for them if they were a little more compromising.

Truth be told, I have heard a lot of backlash about their affiliation program as well. Cannot say what their reason was, in that context, for behaving so unprofessionally.

OK, let me tell you a story that happened recently.

I run Talksearch, a search engine for Bitcointalk, and back when the indexing servers were still hosted on Google Cloud, I went to go pay the invoice by loading my linked PayWithUs card. Well at the cryptomus checkout page, after making the transaction I realized that I had sent them money I received from OKmix (directly, from their telegram contact, as a payment for services delivered to my other website, the BitMixList mixer directory), and the payment to Cryptomus was blocked.

Well I said OK, let me send them clean LTC that I obtained from Wizardswap - blocked too.

To "refund" (they would not allow the deposits to go through), they wanted detailed information about the transactions.

Unfortunately I had deleted the Wizardswap exchange details a couple of days prior, so no details available for that one.

So I was thinking OK let me just send them my correspondence with OKmix but of course I know that my service providers do not like my directory service and find it risky.

So if they see anything related to mixers then they will just demand additional information even though it's not connected to the other service I was trying to fund. So to be clear, I never sent them any details. It was not even a lot of money anyway (2x $100), no big deal now that payment processors are trying to play judge.

Or is it??

Would you like to be demanded for your ID and utility bill when using a POS terminal at any store? I'm not talking about regulated industries like weapons and bars, but ANY store. Like Walmart. Or an Apple Store.

No? Ok, well we have our answer then.

I wouldn't like to be demanded for such information either.

Now a legit service has lost my business because their payment processor does not want me as a customer. Do you think it's fair for them?

KYC is a required part of applying for banks, loans, and debit cards (even online). That does not mean we should make it mandatory for all types of payments just because it's crypto.

*edited for spelling

KYC is a good idea; I just believe it is executed terribly and recklessly. Hence, I especially agree with the last part: there is no point in making it mandatory for absolutely everything – unless you are up to something.

A few weeks ago, I sent a few bucks to a known exchanger, the funds got frozen, a refund was not possible. No big deal, that is on me. If I had exchanged them P2P instead, some innocent crypto enthusiast from across the Pacific or from the Middle East would have received them. And it would have been his problem. And I seriously doubt any of the high-level operating con artists would send them to a KYC-enforcing exchanger. Among the actual crypto users, there are simply no winners in this.

The worst part might be that I personally cannot tell whether all of this will worsen in the future, or if we will get lucky and privacy will come back into vogue.

You cannot provide such an exceptional service and then vanish into oblivion.

That's the only way after offering an exceptional privacy service.

  Touché

[Pmalek]

A few weeks ago, I sent a few bucks to a known exchanger, the funds got frozen, a refund was not possible. No big deal, that is on me. If I had exchanged them P2P instead, some innocent crypto enthusiast from across the Pacific or from the Middle East would have received them. And it would have been his problem. And I seriously doubt any of the high-level operating con artists would send them to a KYC-enforcing exchanger. Among the actual crypto users, there are simply no winners in this.

KYC, AML, and SoF checks should work the following way, if applicable: The exchange asks you to provide the address that you will pay from. When you do, they do their background checks with their third-party blockchain analysis providers. You receive feedback that states that your coins are either ok or additional information will be needed from you. If it's the latter, the exchange should inform you what documents you will need to provide and why to go ahead and exchange the funds from the address you submitted. It's then up to each individual user to decide how to proceed. Give up on using that service or submit all the data and hope for the best.

But this isn't going to happen. Why? In many cases, the exchanges don't even know why certain coins are deemed dirty and unwanted and they don't care. They just get the green or red light from their partner services and forward the information to users. They also won't implement this because it's a great opportunity to steal crypto from users and direct it towards their pools for other customers to swap with, while giving the original owner a hard time. 

The worst part might be that I personally cannot tell whether all of this will worsen in the future, or if we will get lucky and privacy will come back into vogue.

Privacy and anonymity coming back to give you greater freedom and possibilities? Yeah, right. Forget about it. It's only going to get worse.

[mmgen-py]

KYC, AML, and SoF checks should work the following way, if applicable: The exchange asks you to provide the address that you will pay from. When you do, they do their background checks with their third-party blockchain analysis providers. You receive feedback that states that your coins are either ok or additional information will be needed from you.

Some exchange services (I won’t name them to keep them off the regulatory radar) actually do work this way.

[examplens]

Some exchange services (I won’t name them to keep them off the regulatory radar) actually do work this way.

You cannot hide anything that is even partially public from the government radar. Cases like eXch or Sinbad mixer have shown that representatives of the government and investigative bodies are widely present here. We don't know who these users are, but they certainly follow what is discussed here closely. I assume it is the same situation on other platforms.

[Pmalek]

Some exchange services (I won’t name them to keep them off the regulatory radar) actually do work this way.

If it's at least a somewhat known centralized exchange, then the regulators and those who need to know are familiar with this business model. I doubt they could hide this from them. Not that they even needed to. Such a business practice can't be considered illegal by regulatory bodies as long as they are still collecting, storing, and sharing the information on their customers as asked by them.

[bitmover]

KYC, AML, and SoF checks should work the following way, if applicable: The exchange asks you to provide the address that you will pay from. When you do, they do their background checks with their third-party blockchain analysis providers. You receive feedback that states that your coins are either ok or additional information will be needed from you.

Some exchange services (I won’t name them to keep them off the regulatory radar) actually do work this way.

I have used some exchanges this way too

The problem is that users simple do not care about this. Usually, people just send funds to exchanges (or swap services) and pray that everything will be ok.

Barely no user opens the support chat, share his address and volume he wants to swap prior to trading.

[Zwei]

Some exchange services (I won’t name them to keep them off the regulatory radar) actually do work this way.

not naming those exchanges to keep them off regulatory radar is pointless if they are public facing, and most likely they are already on their radar. so dropping names won't hurt them one bit, it's free advertising for them if they are good and worth using.

We don't know who these users are, but they certainly follow what is discussed here closely. I assume it is the same situation on other platforms.

yep, big brother is always watching.

I have used some exchanges this way too

The problem is that users simple do not care about this. Usually, people just send funds to exchanges (or swap services) and pray that everything will be ok.

Barely no user opens the support chat, share his address and volume he wants to swap prior to trading.

can you name the best ones? asking for a friend who is still looking for a good alternative to eXch 

[bitmover]

can you name the best ones? asking for a friend who is still looking for a good alternative to eXch 

I have been using Swapuz and CCECash.

I believe ccecash is better, however the fees are terrible high... swapuz has much lower  fees.

I always ask in the support about my addresses before seeing coins. Never had problems and I always send in batches of small amounts