FATF: Possible Death Of Privacy Coins?

You’re right. It’s a tough one. Letting the establishment monopolize the narrative means little freedom and no progress.

That’s why I emphasized,

But if the choice is between something or nothing, I feel like we have the obligation to try a variety of approaches. Trying doesn’t mean committing. We have to try and see what sticks, and sticks for different stakeholders. So that we don’t ultimately become a small group of believers of inconsequential import and impact.

What do you think? For the record I like that you raise this concern, which rests in my mind too.

3 Likes

Zcash is shielded cash, not chain-analysis cash. If Zcash goes the route of funding backdoor viewing keys for bad guys, thankfully there are alternative, efficient cryptocurrencies out there for P2P electronic cash.

1 Like

What are you talking about, funding “backdoors” for bad guys? It’s not like ECC or ZFND have a record of all shielded transactions written down somewhere. I don’t think it is even mathematically possible to do, only the creator of a Z-address has the ability to create a viewing key.

3 Likes

Here: FATF: Possible Death Of Privacy Coins?
“That’s an opening that we should welcome with open arms. We should fund projects that help create make this “ context ” solid in they eyes of law enforcers.”

Here: FATF: Possible Death Of Privacy Coins?
"1) Third party solutions.

These solutions could verify the pattern and sources/destinations of funds are as described to VASPs when a user went through KYC or due diligence. Like a Chainalysis or Elliptic but focused on privacy coins.

Having a third party creates a layer for law enforcers that “checks” VASPs’ compliance with their own policies.

These solutions may need to hold viewing keys. They should be designed by people who are experts in privacy and security, since it would defeat the purpose if z transactions users see them holding viewing keys as a potential risk.

Create addresses where law enforcers could look up z transactions that have opted in to some level of scrutiny, but the owners of the addresses will know when their transactions are viewed. This is different than the current viewing keys, which need to be provided specifically to the viewer, and viewing does not result in detection."

That is a idea from @ml_sudo regarding a possible way for the end-user to opt-in to some sort of system to share viewing keys with third parties.

Not really the same as some “backdoor” in the code which would compromise Z-addresses and the privacy of the users on the network.

As a MGRC candidate I would never support anything that compromises users privacy and I don’t think ECC or ZFND would either.

9 Likes

There’s the whole ‘selective disclosure’ thing at some point - basically a viewkey for a single transaction.

I can see that being useful, but I live in a country where you have to produce paperwork related to significant txns. Buy a car from a Colombian…lots of paperwork.

Carte blanche access to a zaddr? No thanks.

3 Likes

If they want to prohibit something, they will prohibit it, no cryptocurrency can lag behind its position, this must be understood. What the ECC is trying to explain to regulators does not essentially change or affect anything. And the use only in an illegal version (as it was earlier with bitcoin, when no one cared about it) is the end for a project that works at the expense of the cost of the coin itself.
I believe that the ability to transfer in both a secure and an open way is an advantage, because you can simply prohibit secure transfers and the network will continue to work, until the laws are weakened, which I believe will definitely be but first tighten the screws.

2 Likes

I have retyped this comment about 4 times because I am triggered.

Im sorry, but did I just crawl out of a hole, or is Zcash not CipherTrace and New York Attorney General Approved?

This speculative legal forum, is 2 things imo…

  1. frivolous
  2. kangaroo court

Both of these things considered, we are fighting for PRIVACY AS A HUMAN RIGHT, that is not negotiable. Its almost as though anyone who is worried about FTAF has entirely missed the core principals that bitcoin sought out to manifest in its whitepaper, and what zcash is a continuation of to strive for a 100% sovereign currency.

When you let regulators touch something, it is NOT SOVEREIGN.

I guess you missed the principals that forged Zcash when Zooko joined the team @ml_sudo

The cost of making anonymity available to upstanding members of the public was making it available to the less savory as well

If you can’t live with Privacy as a Human Right, tough luck, you came to the wrong community to be concerned about FTAF, go right a PhD in Law or STFU please. You spammed this content to inappropriate places seeking attention imo as well.

1 Like

Hey @PhusionPhil, sorry to trigger you.

If I can ask you to read my post again, but slowly this time, you’ll see that I’m trying to help us win through diplomacy and strategic wedges. I don’t believe dropping a grenade and demanding that others see our point of view will get us to where we want to get to. Who won the Telegram war, for example? It wasn’t Telegram.

“The greatest victory is that which requires no battle.” ― Sun Tzu, The Art of War

4 Likes

Agree 1000%

4 Likes

Some of us are willing to “die on this hill” if the ultimatum that put us on that “hill” violates our human rights. Compliance to the toxic banking industry is very low on my priorities as an independent human being, they FAILED at central reserve banking and that’s why Bitcoin has so much support. Know it all policy makers are a burden on every free minded critical thinker on the planet and 1 set of laws is a extremely narrow minded approach to do any appeasement of.

KYC is already practiced in any developed nation that use SWIFT code or FINTRAC. Both those organization (unions, whatever the fuck you call that circle jerk of less than 80 human beings doing world banking title roles with kangaroo court authority) can literally cry me a river if they are not educated enough to keep up with CipherTrace after their long track record of failing to stop money laundering, looks like a giant failure to me, I live in Canada and just watched half the world bribe their way into quebec as soon as the 3rd world country (WHO WASN’T SWIFT COMPLIANT) was given special privilege to due to Canada’s policy on immigration. I am 100% sure there is ethics violations that arent going to be looked into, so I look at these organizations with the same low brow standard they operate at, and in Canada your SWIFT code is walked all over like a joke, litterally a useless legal tool if I have ever seen one.

I wont be taking compliance or ethics lessons from any traditional banker, thanks but no thanks. Turn the cheek 1 more time …

1 Like

I really miss the old days of bitcoin, and the hopes and dreams people had for it too, but bitcoin is not the thing to do that, it never was. zcash really might be, but for the project to get that far we need to not get taken out by people like FATF, that is going to involve learning their rules. this is not like 10 years ago. They know the threat crypto and privacy coins in particular pose to them.

The better we understand them the better we can work around them. This how hackers work. learn all the rules and find the funky interactions.

No, she did not come to the wrong community.

I am very concerned (as I think we all are) with the FTAF and how they are going to try to screw our project.

I get it is deeply personal to you, thank you for explaining that. I empathise, as I think everyone here does, it is why we are here. It does help understand your hard stance on this subject. However, I have had similar issues on the forums very recently. Getting upset at ml_sudo is not going to help.

More diverse specialist knowledge = good.

I also know quite a bit about FINTECH compliance (but in a slightly different area) so I am learning a great deal from ml_sudo’s posts and have been encouraging her to post more content like this. It has certainly helping me think of ways around new potential issues.

forewarned is forearmed.

4 Likes

FINTRAC has proven they are not capable of regulating International trade, the example is the Vancouver Stock Exchange. I do not respect this agency or is lackluster approach to financial regulation in Canada. The agency’s we are debating complying with should immediately be sent cease and desist orders for their human rights violations, not considered a threat, they are criminals because they didn’t commit to their duty to report internal corruption on so many occasions, there is no premise for trust to be discussed when they think we should trust their ethics on “how to legally transact” when they are guilty of crimes they don’t answer to.

1 Like

Yes mate, I know, we are on the same side.

I very much see them as a threat because of their human rights violations. We (people everywhere) are pretty screwed by the finance and banking laws, they are constantly used to oppress us in real life.

This is why true freedom starts with financial privacy. (I know im preaching to the choir. Laissez-faire liberalism ftw!)

I am asking please don’t try to shutdown this discussion, or more specifically ml_sudo’s input to the forums. Even if you find it distasteful, it is useful to the community and we do need these discussions. We need to talk about this stuff and be aware of it at the very least.

We need to be able to protect ourselves - that does not involve bending the knee to these organisations, but coming up with mechanism that prevent them from taking us out - which is what the information ml_sudo is providing helps with and why this is so important.

3 Likes
5 Likes