Topic: Are no KYC casinos taking risks? - page 5. (Read 634 times)

There's a risk with or without KYCs because having a KYC has lots of pros and cons but personally, I would rather comply with it if it's really a requirement rather than looking for a casino that won't ask for KYC yet the legitimacy is a problem. If you don't want any trouble with the transactions, it's better to do the KYC process rather than avoid it and look for casinos that won't ask it because most trusted and reputable casinos these days are asking for KYC which is unavoidable as well. There will always be risk but we must choose the risk that we're wiling to take.

I'm sorry, but it seems like you misunderstood the purpose of KYC. Actually, it would not be implemented if it did not help the government combat illegal online activities. It might be risky for some, especially for those planning to launder money using the casino. However, for those who are playing just for fun with no bad intentions, it's a way to protect them. Besides, our regulators are closely monitoring the casinos, and they won't allow them to abuse the gamblers. Therefore, if you are a victim of casino abuse, you can report it to the authorities and file a legal action against them.

KYC is usually risky everywhere. Similarly gambling using gambling sites without Kyc is also risky.  Because without kyc if one wins high amount then withdrawing it can be difficult and many more problems. But those Web3 casinos can be used without kyc because in this case a personal wallet has to be connected and any winnings go directly to the personal wallet.  So kyc is not a big problem here.  But if you are using a centralis casino site then definitely complete the kyc before gambling

On the contraty, I think that what the OP (correct me if I'm wrong) meant is that no KYC is not a safe practice for them (gambling platforms).

I think that it will depend on the jurisdiction they are licensed in, on one hand, and the citizenship of the players, on the other hand. If I'm not wrong, legislations among countries differ so much that there must be many exceptions to mandatory KYC. But I'm not any expert, it is just my perception.

From where did you come up with this understanding that fraud cases have become a big problem? Do you have any stats to prove what you have claimed? If you have then do share the link where it has been proven with numbers. I think you are overreacting to the fraud issue.


No KYC casinos still exist and they will continue to unless users stop using them. Do not force your point of view on others, if you do not like anything that does not mean others should not like it. Again it depends on the owner of the casino to implement KYC or not. The owner has launched his casino business to make money do remember.

Casino can’t be regulated without any KYC procedures since knowing customers is the only way to become regulated not only in casino but on all the services that you are using. How will the government regulate the casino if there’s no info available?

AML policy number requirements is KYC to track those user that will commit fraud using the service. It’s not casino who decide about the implementation of KYC. It’s a must when they get their license. It’s not an optional but rather a command from their license provider.

Crypto casino can operate without being regulated since crypto is not yet regulated on many countries. But since casino is a business and want a long term operation without any problem in the future. They decided to follow the general requirements to become regulated.

I think that KYC is a hot topic in most cases but here is how huge reputable casinos deal with it so far,they don't ask it mandatory for you if you register there up to a certain amount usually 0.005-0.01 Bitcoin as a maximum amount you can withdraw without being verified and I am talking about crypto casinos in here not FIAT ones,they have it mandatory because of rules there and those who do not ask it then a big red flag.

I think the KYC style adopted by most reputable crypto casinos is great,play up to a certain amount,the one mentioned above but you cannot withdraw more than that without being verified.I think this is the best option.

You are right, now things can be quite good when it comes to withdrawals and they can happen in other ways depending on the deposit, I have not been able to witness that for a small amount they require KYC, but as everything is I say that they are going to ask a KYC that is something for sure, I know that when you exceed 1000usd you can be present to comply with a more difficult KYC with more demands, these things are the ones I don't like, because if I am in a casino and I win, If I am lucky, I have the right to withdraw my money, and if I want to withdraw that money in its entirety I can do so, then if they put more KYC that is something I no longer like, because then they look like banks asking for explanations.

rule of thumbs:
if a casino is not compliant with all the rules that concern their operations (in this case KYC) how can I be sure that in the event of disputes or problems they will look after my interest and act honestly?

The only bets without KYC that "make sense" are those that are made via "oracle" protocols or other smart contracts in which by design it is useless and impossible to carry out such security check and not even the legislator could have any requests in this regard.

It's not possible, the casino can be a transit point for money laundering if there is no AMC policy It is a safeguard for the whole industry so they will not become a transit point of terrorist dirty money/

That's possible they have an obligation and they are tied to the terms of their license issuer to conduct KYC so if casinos promote themselves as a no KYC it's possible that they are not registered and they are not under the terms of any regulatory body and there's risk playing on these casinos.

The users will feel confident like you to invest or use the online casinos if they are registered to a country where KYC/AML policy is strictly applicable and they are asking for the KYC to be completed.

Like for example, online wallets or exchanges were not regulated or there was no KYC mandate policy in India previously. So people used to have a fear of entering this crypto world and using the exchanges/wallets of these companies. But after they started regulating, imposing a tax, and asking for KYC/AML policy to be followed, the user count on these exchanges/wallets increased a lot. I have seen my friends start trading in these exchanges just for the faith they got in them for regulation.

Many countries have not mandated KYC policies for these kinds of companies/websites related to betting or adding money.
Now, these casinos/companies won't get fined because they are registered in countries where these policies are absent or not heavily/strictly exercised. But the problem is that even if they are registered, the user will be hesitant just because the government itself is so relaxed, how can one trust a company registered to such countries?

As a user, research before getting into any gambling sites or any place where you are going to be adding/sending some of your hard-earned money. Getting scammed will hurt you more than losing on a genuine gambling site while gambling.

It is possible to run a casino without KYC policies and procedures, but it is indeed a risk of the owner and the staff of the webpage. Eventually, if the grow big enough, they will likely catch the attention of regulators and law, and will be forced to apply regulations over their gamblers data, so they can continue to operate.

On the other hand, I have always got the impression non-KYC casinos tried to discourage cheaters, farmers and bonus abusers by other methods, like IP verification, Bitcoin address analysis and behavioral patterns which could help the to highlight those who are most likely breaking their Terms of Service.

Each casino may take its chances, but we will never know what those risks will be. Currently, there are still casinos that do not ask their users for KYC so that users can still freely gamble and withdraw their money. However, it seems that casinos have limits that must be adhered to in withdrawing money because if users exceed those limits, they will be asked to do KYC. If the regulator's policies regulate the casino, the casino must have a license so that the regulator can supervise the casino. Casino owners don't want to run into problems so they will register their casinos with regulators and their casinos will also ask for KYC from their users.

Yet with those casinos that are demanding for casinos still get cracked down by the authorities in the case of a fraudulent allegations arising from or through their casino or company.  No demanding for identity check by no KYC casinos doesn't mean they don't have security measures to ensure that customers don't flaunt the system.

Even with kyc some dubious customers still manipulate the identity check process by rendering fake identity. Now how's that usually possible if the KYC casinos are said to be the best in your opinion?

Fraudulent cases are peculiar to both kyc and non-kyc casinos and businesses, it's left for users to also take responsibility of their security too in the best way they can while the company does theirs.

Same with those asking for kyc not all are registered that's why we all advise to make use of reputable casinos that have gained reputation over the years. You can't tell me that all no kyc casinos are not registered cause that's not correct.

Maybe you need to read this too Why KYC is extremely dangerous – and useless : 1miau

I know there are casinos that implement no KYC that can be said to be reputable in the crypto gambling business, such as BcGames, Fairspin, CloudBet, Metaspins, and Stakes. In fact, the casinos that have KYC and no KYC rules still have their pros and cons.

Of course, with no KYC, when it comes to the data privacy of the individual, their anonymity is relatively secure, and when it comes to withdrawal, it is also fast, while with KYC rules, sometimes the withdrawal transaction process takes a long time. With no KYC rules, there are problems with casinos because the gambler who has a gambling account has no fight.

Maybe we should also ask these casinos that how much are they spending on the security network of their casino website that such guide against any fraudulent attempts, are the casinos also to be responsible for user's who are careless about how they handle their gambling account, i hope we realized that fraud is not only in gambling section alone, but common to other sectors and anyone can be involved.


So you're saying that the no KYC casinos are rather not safe for us to use, what impact has the ones demanding for KYC made in the lives of gamblers, have you even consider the reason for creating a gambling platform that requires no kyc, maybe you have to think about privacy in all you do, if you've never been a victim maybe you may not really understand why privacy.

The AML policy has came into effect in later years after the KYC procedures have been required. When you sign up for a gambling site, you are typically required to provide certain information, which is considered KYC already. The specifics of KYC can vary from site to site. Some may be satisfied with basic information, while others may request documents to verify the accuracy of the information provided. Many sites currently do not require document verification, instead opting for information input. However, it's possible that they may introduce document verification in the future, so it's a good idea to be prepared for that possibility.

The size of your wager can indeed be a significant factor. If you consistently lose, sites may not be as concerned with KYC. But if you are winning, which means you are receiving funds from the gambling site, that's when they might implement more stringent KYC requirements.

Fraud cases are becoming a real problem for gambling industry, from schemes like bonus hunting, account farming, account hijacks and illicit chargebacks on the rise I believe that many new casinos aren't prepared for the menace ahead.

Some casinos still believe that not asking for KYC is cool, but it's actually not, I see casinos with no kyc as a red flag because you can't run your business this way without getting into trouble with regulators.

Casinos neglect identity check but little did they know that they can be fined for it, if fraud cases arise from your casino and it's been investigated, your business is going away soon or you pay up for fine. One, for failing to screen customers using the KYC process, two, for possible running of unregistered casino.

Do you think your casino can be regulated without the AML policy? The requirements says it's all, so is it possible that those casinos doing their no KYC stuffs are not even registered?