Bitkub - Intrusive KYC.

[phetphet]

Recently received an email from Bitkub asking me to update my information for KYC. Fair enough.

 

However, the questionnaire seems really intrusive. Asking for far more information than what is required to confirm one's identity.

 

Anyone else had this?

 

Is it breaking any laws to just lie to questions I feel are not necessary?

[ukrules]

They're going to need to know where your money comes from if dealing with large amounts.

 

A problem with crypto exchanges is that they often go far above and beyond what's required for relatively small amounts, for example they may require the same information for someone depositing $10k as someone who's depositing $2 million.

[ChaiyaTH]

5 minutes ago, ukrules said:

They're going to need to know where your money comes from if dealing with large amounts.

 

A problem with crypto exchanges is that they often go far above and beyond what's required for relatively small amounts, for example they may require the same information for someone depositing $10k as someone who's depositing $2 million.

That is mainly due to the fact banks would still stop this automatically per transfer if suddenly sending a lot or doing unusual amounts of transfers while crypto, and within it's functionality usually process this realtime or very fast.

This aside of the fact that some of the functionalities are around trading, margin/leverage options and futures (always require more).

[GrandPapillon]

25 minutes ago, phetphet said:

Anyone else had this?

 

Is it breaking any laws to just lie to questions I feel are not necessary?

it's just an increase of global oversight for KYC and AML, and the requirements will increase every year until it becomes unbearable. That's the point, they don't want to forbid things, so instead they make things impossible ????

 

Bitcoins is doomed,

[ukrules]

1 minute ago, GrandPapillon said:

it's just an increase of global oversight for KYC and AML, and the requirements will increase every year until it becomes unbearable. That's the point, they don't want to forbid things, so instead they make things impossible ????

 

Bitcoins is doomed,

Not just for Crypto, it will be for everything, be careful what you wish for because any rule changes to KYC/AML regulations will be applied to every investment you ever make going forward.

 

[GrandPapillon]

Just now, ukrules said:

Not just for Crypto, it will be for everything, be careful what you wish for because any rule changes to KYC/AML regulations will be applied to every investment you ever make going forward.

 

it's already happening, what the crypto guys are facing now, I have been facing it for the last 10 years.

 

It got so bad for the Futures and Commodities markets (to curb oil and commodities speculation), I had to stop trading some Futures contracts so the CFTC requirements could be waived.

[GrandPapillon]

I wouldn't want to be an oil trader working in Russia or for a Russian trading firm right now ????

[ukrules]

3 minutes ago, GrandPapillon said:

I wouldn't want to be an oil trader working in Russia or for a Russian trading firm right now ????

A common misconception is that all Russians are sanctioned, the reality is that the list contains a few hundred names including companies.

The rest is just virtue signalling by western companies pressured by the media. For example McDonalds who are a franchise have apparently announced they're ceasing operations in Russia. These are Russian owned and operated companies. The mind boggles.

[GrandPapillon]

3 minutes ago, ukrules said:

The rest is just virtue signalling by western companies pressured by the media. For example McDonalds who are a franchise have apparently announced they're ceasing operations in Russia. These are Russian owned and operated companies. The mind boggles.

indeed, and the closure is only temporary

 

yeah, it's all posturing and PR stunts, the west is caught naked and can't do anything with Ukraine invasion, so symbols and tokens is all there is left to feel good about yourself ????

 

[Whale]

There are some interesting threads on Youtube were people on the street are asked questions like "how are the sanctions affecting you?"

 

Fascinating answers, esp to see the opinions differing from the young to the older.

 

FYI nearly all said they had seen absolutely no difference (yet) from the sanctions.

[Whale]

On 3/9/2022 at 3:07 PM, phetphet said:

Asking for far more information than what is required to confirm one's identity.

I left HSBC because I felt the KYC questions had gotten out of hand, only to have to answer the same questions with my new bank. They let me open the account before they sprung KYC on me though which peeed me off.

 

I assume the KYC in Thailand is a standard across all as its probably mandated by BOT. Although I cannot ever recall being asked to do one with my Thai bank to date. Maybe in next year we all get hit with this.

[Jenkins9039]

On 3/9/2022 at 3:22 PM, ukrules said:

They're going to need to know where your money comes from if dealing with large amounts.

 

A problem with crypto exchanges is that they often go far above and beyond what's required for relatively small amounts, for example they may require the same information for someone depositing $10k as someone who's depositing $2 million.

I had 'enhanced due diligence' video call with an American sounding person in 2019/20... So a questionnaire doesn't sound too bad!

[Jenkins9039]

Just an update, i had the questionnaire this evening (free 100thb if completed).

 

Weird how they're asking this information (again) 3rd time.

Oh and something new this time.

 

When exchanges do this, i would advise complying, then cease using, move on, that way you've adhered to the request/law etc, but at the same time, you are no longer putting funds into their pocket, after-all you don't need this for a bank, so why should you need for an exchange.

Edited March 16, 2022 by Jenkins9039

[ukrules]

1 hour ago, Jenkins9039 said:

Just an update, i had the questionnaire this evening (free 100thb if completed).

 

Weird how they're asking this information (again) 3rd time.

Oh and something new this time.

I wonder if this is being sent to everybody or just foreigners and then US citizens especially due to the 'special' regulations the US system applies to overseas accounts.

 

I note that the example document is in English so they're not going to send this out to Thai nationals.

 

[GrandPapillon]

1 hour ago, Jenkins9039 said:

Just an update, i had the questionnaire this evening (free 100thb if completed).

 

Weird how they're asking this information (again) 3rd time.

Oh and something new this time.

 

When exchanges do this, i would advise complying, then cease using, move on, that way you've adhered to the request/law etc, but at the same time, you are no longer putting funds into their pocket, after-all you don't need this for a bank, so why should you need for an exchange.

who pays 1000 USD for website hosting and domain ????

 

is that tax invoice even legit ? ????

[richard_smith237]

50 minutes ago, GrandPapillon said:

who pays 1000 USD for website hosting and domain ????

 

is that tax invoice even legit ? ????

Of course not… it’s an example provided by Bitkub to show what they need. 
 

They are asking for proof of where foreigners signing into Bitkub are paying tax. 

[GrandPapillon]

pay VAT tax is same same as paying tax in a country now?

 

jesus, they really lowered the bar for KYC ????

Edited March 17, 2022 by GrandPapillon

[fdsa]

On 3/17/2022 at 1:58 AM, GrandPapillon said:

who pays 1000 USD for website hosting and domain ????

google:// how much does bulletproof hosting cost

 

google:// how much does the real bulletproof hosting cost not that <deleted> in panama you showed me in the first search results

 

[GrandPapillon]

hiring a security consultant to "harden" your webserver is not "website hosting" ????

[fdsa]

Yes, you are right - "hardening" the webserver is not "website hosting" and it has nothing to do with the hosting cost.

Still buying a bulletproof domain + hosting the website in a safe location could cost well above 1000 USD/mo.

[userabcd]

 

 

Edited March 20, 2022 by userabcd

[Jenkins9039]

* Just something else i remembered, BITKUB are also asking whether you've transferred crypto from offshore.

 

Not entirely sure how that works, as the UK Gov etc considers crypto to be where you are, as such if living in Thailand, then the crypto is with you in Thailand, likewise the Thai government see's crypto as all activities occurred from Thai soil to be within Thailand, as such the crypto being where you are.

 

Unless they mean 'crypto exchanges', which is where it gets tricky, Satang for example is surely a nested exchange using Binance's technology in some form (not necessary liquidity) but all transactions go through Binance x wallet, as such those transactions although on shore are technically offshore.

 

Then to make matters worse, you could transfer Binance -> Satang -> Bitkub.

 

That would mean your funds came from offshore, entered a on-shore exchange, where you withdrew from (which sends from Binance x wallet) to Bitkub.

 

Lol

[GrandPapillon]

On 3/18/2022 at 6:29 AM, fdsa said:

Yes, you are right - "hardening" the webserver is not "website hosting" and it has nothing to do with the hosting cost.

Still buying a bulletproof domain + hosting the website in a safe location could cost well above 1000 USD/mo.

now you puzzle me, bullet proof domain? care to elaborate, out of curiosity, what is your definition of "bullet proof domain" ????

 

"hosting in safe location", same here, I am curious what you mean by "safe location"

[Heng]

Regulate all they want, as long as there are on-ramps and off-ramps anywhere in the world, it'll be about as effective as fiat controls.     

[phetphet]

12 hours ago, Jenkins9039 said:

* Just something else i remembered, BITKUB are also asking whether you've transferred crypto from offshore.

 

Not entirely sure how that works, as the UK Gov etc considers crypto to be where you are, as such if living in Thailand, then the crypto is with you in Thailand, likewise the Thai government see's crypto as all activities occurred from Thai soil to be within Thailand, as such the crypto being where you are.

 

Unless they mean 'crypto exchanges', which is where it gets tricky, Satang for example is surely a nested exchange using Binance's technology in some form (not necessary liquidity) but all transactions go through Binance x wallet, as such those transactions although on shore are technically offshore.

 

Then to make matters worse, you could transfer Binance -> Satang -> Bitkub.

 

That would mean your funds came from offshore, entered a on-shore exchange, where you withdrew from (which sends from Binance x wallet) to Bitkub.

 

Lol

What if you remove all holdings from Bitkub and store them on a hard wallet? Where does that leave you?

 

Also I noticed that if you make an error filling in the questionnaire, you cannot go back to alter it.

[fdsa]

On 3/21/2022 at 2:13 AM, GrandPapillon said:

now you puzzle me, bullet proof domain? care to elaborate, out of curiosity, what is your definition of "bullet proof domain" ????

 

"hosting in safe location", same here, I am curious what you mean by "safe location"

A "bulletproof domain" means a domain name that will not get disabled by the registrar if any "abuse report" comes.

A "bulletproof hosting" (what I've rephrased as a "safe location") means a server or a web hosting account that will not get turned off or disabled by the hosting provider if any "abuse report" comes.

Those ads about "offshore bulletproof hosting" for $25 (and even for $250) you might have seen in Google are fake.

[GrandPapillon]

36 minutes ago, fdsa said:

A "bulletproof domain" means a domain name that will not get disabled by the registrar if any "abuse report" comes.

A "bulletproof hosting" (what I've rephrased as a "safe location") means a server or a web hosting account that will not get turned off or disabled by the hosting provider if any "abuse report" comes.

Those ads about "offshore bulletproof hosting" for $25 (and even for $250) you might have seen in Google are fake.

ok not sure about that one,

 

the "bulletproof domain" do not exist, at $25 or $1000, registrars have to follow court orders if there is an IP complain, failing to do that and ICAAN will get involved or some "root server" registrar will eventually turn you off. They have no other choice. Criminal activities have no "protection".

 

I have a "controversial" domain and for over 25 years, no registrar disabled me, despite some "abuse reports", and even though Google has blacklisted that domain name in the Search engine at the request of a "powerful organization" on the web. Without court orders or a clear violation of registrar policies, they can't turn you off. And if they do, file a complain to ICAAN. I certainly didn't pay $1000 on annual fees for this.

 

as for "Safe hosting", I can see some ISP taking advantages of "hosting" controversial websites and illegal activities (hackers, porn, warez, bittorrent etc...) and charging a fortune for accepting them and burning their IPs address in the process ????

 

now if someone is foolish enough to register a domain name at the same place with their hosting solution, and start selling "illegal" sh*t, then they get what they deserve, at $25 or $1000.

 

Always separate domain hosting provider from your web hosting provider, that's basic "proofing" for you web activities.

 

Edited March 22, 2022 by GrandPapillon

[fdsa]

7 minutes ago, GrandPapillon said:

ok not sure about that one,

 

the "bulletproof domain" do not exist, at $25 or $1000, registrars have to follow court orders if there is an IP complain, failing to do that and ICAAN will get involved or some "root server" registrar will eventually turn you off. They have no other choice. Criminal activities have no "protection".

 

I have a "controversial" domain and for over 25 years, no registrar disabled me, despite some "abuse reports", and even though Google has blacklisted that domain name in the Search engine at the request of a "powerful organization" on the web. Without court orders or a clear violation of registrar policies, they can't turn you off. And if they do, file a complain to ICAAN. I certainly didn't pay $1000 on annual fees for this.

 

as for "Safe hosting", I can see some ISP taking advantages of "hosting" controversial websites and illegal activities (hackers, porn, warez, bittorrent etc...) and charging a fortune for accepting them and burning their IPs address in the process ????

 

now if someone is foolish enough to register a domain name at the same place with their hosting solution, and start selling "illegal" sh*t, then they get what they deserve, at $25 or $1000.

 

Always separate domain hosting provider from your web hosting provider, that's basic "proofing" for you web activities.

 

and thus you've proved that you have no idea about the topic, same with the cryptocurrencies and possibly other topics I dont remember.

[GrandPapillon]

8 minutes ago, fdsa said:

and thus you've proved that you have no idea about the topic, same with the cryptocurrencies and possibly other topics I dont remember.

haha, I think I just exposed you for your full ignore on that topic, crypto boy ????

 

nobody in any "legal" activity is paying for $1000 domain names and hosting ????

 

hence why showing a dodgy invoice like this for KYC could actually raise major "red" flags for compliance

 

because nobody "normal" is paying that kind of money for a basic hosting,

 

now if you are a crypto miner and need a lot of CPUs, and some high flying gamer boy needing "buying tokens", then hosting will be "expensive" and more like $5K/$10K a year with expensive hosts starting at $150/mo

Edited March 22, 2022 by GrandPapillon

[GrandPapillon]

and guess what, if the ISP receive complains for your activities, you will still be "shutdown"

 

"bullet proof" hosting for illegal activities does not exist, even TheTorrentBay had to change servers and IPs hundreds of times over 15 years, because no where was safe.

 

Eventually they called it quit, despite some early success in having protection from the EU