Return-Path: Received: from smtp1.linuxfoundation.org (smtp1.linux-foundation.org [172.17.192.35]) by mail.linuxfoundation.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 90E61CF5 for ; Thu, 27 Aug 2015 16:06:23 +0000 (UTC) X-Greylist: from auto-whitelisted by SQLgrey-1.7.6 Received: from mail.help.org (mail.help.org [70.90.2.18]) by smtp1.linuxfoundation.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 5224718D for ; Thu, 27 Aug 2015 16:06:13 +0000 (UTC) Received: from [10.1.10.25] (B [10.1.10.25]) by mail.help.org with ESMTPA ; Thu, 27 Aug 2015 12:06:09 -0400 To: bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org References: From: Milly Bitcoin Message-ID: <55DF356C.7020807@bitcoins.info> Date: Thu, 27 Aug 2015 12:06:04 -0400 User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 6.3; WOW64; rv:38.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/38.2.0 MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: Content-Type: text/plain; charset=windows-1252; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.9 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00 autolearn=ham version=3.3.1 X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.3.1 (2010-03-16) on smtp1.linux-foundation.org Subject: Re: [bitcoin-dev] BIPS proposal for implementing AML-KYC in bitcoin X-BeenThere: bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12 Precedence: list List-Id: Bitcoin Development Discussion List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 27 Aug 2015 16:06:23 -0000 > So where is the solution? What to do? AML-KYC is mostly something that sits on top of the Bitcoin protocol. Take Coinase, inc. as an example. They check bank accounts before they open your account and they link your Bitcoin address to your account in their database. Then they ask for an explanation of why you are using the account. Then they track your coins to a certain extent once you actually buy Bitcoins. None of these activities are directly involving the protocol or would require changes to the Bitcoin system. What you can do is develop standards for using Bitcoin and entities that need to follow AML-KYC can choose to follow those standards if they want when they conduct business using Bitcoin. You can add a small amount of extraneous data to transactions that could show you followed some AML-KYC procedure. If you did that you could have a "white list" of complaint transactions rather than a "black list" of non-compliant transactions as you seem to be proposing. I am not sure how you would actually do something like that or how it would work but it is an interesting concept (not necessarily good, but interesting). Russ