One idea: A regulated financial institution could confirm with mathematical proof that the holder of an address sending or receiving cryptocurrency had at some point been verified by a trusted source for KYC purposes without needing to know the address holder’s name or other identifying information. The proof would be required only at the on- and off-ramps between on-chain crypto world and the financial system – i.e., when a cryptocurrency is being exchanged for fiat currency – to keep on-chain crypto transactions frictionless. Meanwhile, we could have system-wide, on-chain data analyses to meet AML needs, identifying nodes engaged in patterns of illicit activity, all without invasive identity requirements.
Related posts
-
Unknown PR Agency Claims to Have Revealed Satoshi’s Identity
An unknown PR agency calling itself PR London Live has announced that it is ready to... -
Statement on ICO’s work to protect children online
Emily Keaney, ICO Deputy Commissioner (Regulatory Policy), said: “Children see sharing their personal information online as... -
As BIS Mulls Shutting Down mBridge, Its Innovation Hub Calls The Project a ‘Public Good’
An international payments project backed by China, the UAE, Thailand and Hong Kong is raising concerns...