I find Soft-KYC equally harmful as KYC, if not more so, since it may give a false sense of security to inexperienced users. Although not as direct as traditional KYC, data points such as bank accounts, credit cards or phone numbers can still be used to trace a user's identity, often with minimal effort by authorities or determined third parties.
Thank you for for all your comments. I will maintain the decision not to list such services.
nostr:note1hmq2s702wz46dk8388ywafdqyktvfs0eajmgdeual8sg4sgzc3csjts7fu
There is no Soft KYC like there is no a little bit pregnant. You are pregnant or you are not 😀
Well, it is considered soft because the party that offers the service won't know your identity unless they take action (which they can easily can). There's an extra step for them to get to you. Your bank has the KYC, and the does not, but there's a very easy step to fully identify you if required.
I see more like: I can kill you, or I can break your spine and put you on a wheelchair. Soft KYC is the wheelchair option.
They have everything on the bank statement. The only missing thing is a smily photo with the date on a paper.
So we have talked about this before elsewhere, but what's the difference between listing this with a disclaimer and listing swap services that sometimes KYC and even sometimes hold funds until KYC? Isn't listing those also giving a false sense of security to inexperienced users?
Not saying this hoping you'll delist them, I think a disclaimer is enough. But, I also think listing someone that sells BTC or XMR for KYC'd fiat payment processor money is perfectly fine with a disclaimer also. And honestly I think it is less risky than listing swap services that hold funds for KYC at random.
Oddbean new post about login | logout