BIPS proposal for implementing AML-KYC in bitcoin
24 messages, 27 to 31 Aug 2015. Started by prabhat.
prabhat (7), s7r (2), Johnson Lau (2), Gavin Andresen (2), Odinn Cyberguerrilla (2), Patrick Strateman, Ahmed Zsales, Chris Pacia, +6 more
Hi,
I am proposing to create a AML-KYC module to control the network and also qualify use cases in OFAC compliant way. Here is the attached doc.
Please provide your feedback and suggestions.
Best, Prabhat Kumar Singh
Are you aware of the prior work in this field?
https://www.reddit.com/r/Bitcoin/comments/1qmbtu/mike_hearn_chair_of_the_bitcoin_foundations_law/
On 08/27/2015 01:10 AM, prabhat via bitcoin-dev wrote:
Quoted text (16 lines)
> Hi, > > I am proposing to create a AML-KYC module to control the network and > also qualify use cases in OFAC compliant way. > Here is the attached doc. > > Please provide your feedback and suggestions. > > Best, > Prabhat Kumar Singh > > > _______________________________________________ > bitcoin-dev mailing list > bitcoin-dev@lists•linuxfoundation•org > https://lists.linuxfoundation.org/mailman/listinfo/bitcoin-dev
I would prefer not to download an attachment.
Generally and without having the benefit of reading your document, AML and or KYC requirements are treated on a jurisdiction by jurisdiction basis. You would probably need to factor obtaining a universal agreement between all of the governments and regional enforcement bodies of the world on the nature and scope of an acceptable set of policies before attempting to attach rules to the protocol. Clearly, when one country unilaterally places politicians of another country on banned lists and vice versa, for example, would create some problems with implementation and automating checks against banned lists produced by each country.
While you could apply a 'home rule' approach, you would be pushing regulatory controls down to individuals transacting between each other without having to go through any regulated intermediaries. This means you have no way to enforce KYC or verify that the details are correct unless you create a system of third party checkers in each country who would enable transactions to proceed. To overcome all of this you would probably need some identity verification system in place first and to add extra fees into the network to pay for the maintenance of the system.
As has already been pointed out, the above would lead to individual coins being tainted with previous ownership details creating the possibility for blacklists rendering some coins worthless and creating the possibility of these coins being passed on to unsuspecting users. All this goes against the spirit of monetary systems, so you are back to regulating end points as and when users come into contact with regulated entities.
Lastly, it might be worth knowing that criminal liability can be placed on individuals responsible for implementing AML and KYC procedures and policies that do not work or allow criminals to circumvent the systems of controls.
On Thu, Aug 27, 2015 at 9:10 AM, prabhat via bitcoin-dev < bitcoin-dev@lists•linuxfoundation•org> wrote:
Quoted text (17 lines)
> Hi, > > I am proposing to create a AML-KYC module to control the network and also > qualify use cases in OFAC compliant way. > Here is the attached doc. > > Please provide your feedback and suggestions. > > Best, > Prabhat Kumar Singh > > _______________________________________________ > bitcoin-dev mailing list > bitcoin-dev@lists•linuxfoundation•org > https://lists.linuxfoundation.org/mailman/listinfo/bitcoin-dev > >
Hello,
Please stop with the nonsense. Bitcoin is a decentralized payment network. It operates globally, so neither jurisdiction can apply to it and have effects. It is the sole responsibility of all the users/businesses involved in Bitcoin to comply with their local regulations while using Bitcoin. Trying to somehow standardize this compliance at the backbone network level will be impossible in the first place, and even if it was possible it would be a _huge_ mistake.
The word 'Bitcoin' already rings a bell in most places of the world where there is a reasonable level of technology available. It is powerful and we should continue the work to improve it. No law enforcement authority or govt. branch is asking more than for users/businesses to comply with the regulations that bind to them. Someone in Belize for example does not have same compliance requests with someone in Germany - which is why this is not even a subject to be discussed on bicoin-dev mailing list. It is unique/custom for each user/business, the requirements depending on their jurisdiction.
On 8/27/2015 11:15 AM, Patrick Strateman via bitcoin-dev wrote:
Quoted text (16 lines)
> Are you aware of the prior work in this field? > > https://www.reddit.com/r/Bitcoin/comments/1qmbtu/mike_hearn_chair_of_the_bitcoin_foundations_law/ > > On 08/27/2015 01:10 AM, prabhat via bitcoin-dev wrote: >> Hi, >> >> I am proposing to create a AML-KYC module to control the network >> and also qualify use cases in OFAC compliant way. Here is the >> attached doc. >> >> Please provide your feedback and suggestions. >> >> Best, Prabhat Kumar Singh >> >>
Thanks for the comments and feedback. I have previously read those threads as suggested by some members. In relation with transactions, I do agree with suggestions that they should be left on their own, and assumed that people would work in the best interest of themselves and society. Everything is debatable, but let's agree with it. But for miners, I can think of no other option to stop those who are hashing and winning blocks+transaction fees and not in safe country list(directly or indirectly). Some have asked for proofs, but that is tough to substantiate. I have hints, honestly.
Would you sit idle if Haqqani network is funded by bitcoin mining?
We have created a billion dollar market by bitcoin and ,sadly, for everyone without borders. Sick, I am saying this, but freedom is more of responsibility than celebrations of open hugs. And those who don't care about it are threat for you and us, equally.
Folks, suggest something, scrap my idea, but let's build something to save this ecosystem, otherwise it is impossible to realise this dream of decentralized currency. Other coins and protocols are there who may implement something, and egoists always meet the ashes.
Criticize with open mind.
Best, Prabhat Kumar Singh
On Thu, Aug 27, 2015 at 3:43 PM, Chris D'Costa <chrisjdcosta@gmail•com> wrote:
Quoted text (31 lines)
> What evidence do you have that there is 'illicit miners and users' and > that there are no illicit users of the non-bitcoin financial systems? > > I can buy drugs openly in Amsterdam for Euros, but cannot in the UK for > sterling. > > Is the act of buying drugs somewhere in the world illicit activity or not? > > > > On 27 August 2015 at 10:10, prabhat via bitcoin-dev < > bitcoin-dev@lists•linuxfoundation•org> wrote: > >> Hi, >> >> I am proposing to create a AML-KYC module to control the network and also >> qualify use cases in OFAC compliant way. >> Here is the attached doc. >> >> Please provide your feedback and suggestions. >> >> Best, >> Prabhat Kumar Singh >> >> _______________________________________________ >> bitcoin-dev mailing list >> bitcoin-dev@lists•linuxfoundation•org >> https://lists.linuxfoundation.org/mailman/listinfo/bitcoin-dev >> >> >
Very good, I can't wait to see it. Please code it up and submit a pull request to github. Don't expect someone will do it for you.
prabhat via bitcoin-dev 於 2015-08-27 08:06 寫到:
Quoted text (6 lines)
> snip. > Folks, suggest something, scrap my idea, but let's build something to > save this ecosystem, otherwise it is impossible to realise this dream > of decentralized currency. Other coins and protocols are there who may > implement something, and egoists always meet the ashes. >
Yes, on it.
Prabhat Kumar Singh
On Thu, Aug 27, 2015 at 5:44 PM, <jl2012@xbt•hk> wrote:
Quoted text (16 lines)
> Very good, I can't wait to see it. Please code it up and submit a pull > request to github. Don't expect someone will do it for you. > > prabhat via bitcoin-dev 於 2015-08-27 08:06 寫到: > > snip. >> > > > Folks, suggest something, scrap my idea, but let's build something to >> save this ecosystem, otherwise it is impossible to realise this dream >> of decentralized currency. Other coins and protocols are there who may >> implement something, and egoists always meet the ashes. >> >> >
Have you talked with anybody at the Bitcoin Foundation about this proposal?
As Chief Scientist of the Foundation, I am strongly opposed to any proposal that puts the Foundation in a position of centralized authority, so this is unacceptable: "The Bitcoin Foundation will act as fair play party and enforcement body to control the misuse of vast financial powers which bitcoin has."
The idea that a central organization can be trusted to keep secrets secure is just fundamentally wrong. In the very recent past we have seen government organizations fail in that task (the NSA, the OPM) and we see commercial organizations that SHOULD be highly motivated to do a good job also fail (e.g. the Ashley Madison leak).
Even if it were technically possible, I would be opposed because decentralization is a bedrock principle of Bitcoin.
Fine point.
So where is the solution? What to do?
Prabhat Kumar Singh
Prabhat Kumar Singh
On Thu, Aug 27, 2015 at 6:58 PM, Gavin Andresen <gavinandresen@gmail•com> wrote:
Quoted text (21 lines)
> Have you talked with anybody at the Bitcoin Foundation about this proposal? > > As Chief Scientist of the Foundation, I am strongly opposed to any > proposal that puts the Foundation in a position of centralized authority, > so this is unacceptable: "The Bitcoin Foundation will act as fair play > party and enforcement body to control the misuse of vast financial powers > which bitcoin has." > > The idea that a central organization can be trusted to keep secrets secure > is just fundamentally wrong. In the very recent past we have seen > government organizations fail in that task (the NSA, the OPM) and we see > commercial organizations that SHOULD be highly motivated to do a good job > also fail (e.g. the Ashley Madison leak). > > Even if it were technically possible, I would be opposed because > decentralization is a bedrock principle of Bitcoin. > > -- > -- > Gavin Andresen >
On Thu, Aug 27, 2015 at 9:39 AM, prabhat <prabhatkr@gmail•com> wrote:
Quoted text (2 lines)
> So where is the solution? What to do? >
This is a development list; organizations like https://coincenter.org/ work on high-level policy issues.
Last I heard, competent law enforcement organizations said they were perfectly capable of tracking down criminals using Bitcoin using traditional investigative techniques (like infiltrating criminal organizations or setting up honeypots). Given how many "dark markets" have either disappeared or been taken down, it seems they are correct.
On 08/27/2015 09:39 AM, prabhat via bitcoin-dev wrote:
Quoted text (3 lines)
> Fine point. > > So where is the solution? What to do?
How about nothing.
Guys, I strongly think the original prabhat e-mail is a parody.
And I find very funny that important people have responded.
But maybe I'm wrong! *:)*
El jue., 27 ago. 2015 a las 11:04, Chris Pacia via bitcoin-dev (< bitcoin-dev@lists•linuxfoundation•org>) escribió:
Quoted text (15 lines)
> > > On 08/27/2015 09:39 AM, prabhat via bitcoin-dev wrote: > > Fine point. > > So where is the solution? What to do? > > > How about nothing. > _______________________________________________ > bitcoin-dev mailing list > bitcoin-dev@lists•linuxfoundation•org > https://lists.linuxfoundation.org/mailman/listinfo/bitcoin-dev >
Quoted text (1 line)
> 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
So you mean that,
1. Govt agencies already know about everything and anything this subject is about, but passively. 2. Due to passive nature, the actions are post incident and not pre. So there is a risk of many ticking time-bombs which some JB (Jack Bauer or James Bond or Jai Singh Rathore) would diffuse. Sorry for being dramatic, the purpose is to make the point, and nothing else. 3. The subjected proposal doesn't breach the decentralisation, but just not like swiss democracy.
I am not a legal expert, but know this much that there are 2 kinds of crimes, one against liberty and other against life. Most of online privacy advocacy is for liberty. But money is attached to life and not liberty. So this has to change. It means life for many and many depend on it.
And the appeal is, Let us get active.
PS: I do not own much of bitcoins to be an advocate, but many others do and any mayhem would affect me somehow, even if in farthest of world.
Best,
Prabhat Kumar Singh
On Thu, Aug 27, 2015 at 7:18 PM, Gavin Andresen <gavinandresen@gmail•com> wrote:
Quoted text (18 lines)
> On Thu, Aug 27, 2015 at 9:39 AM, prabhat <prabhatkr@gmail•com> wrote: > >> So where is the solution? What to do? >> > > This is a development list; organizations like https://coincenter.org/ > work on high-level policy issues. > > Last I heard, competent law enforcement organizations said they were > perfectly capable of tracking down criminals using Bitcoin using > traditional investigative techniques (like infiltrating criminal > organizations or setting up honeypots). Given how many "dark markets" have > either disappeared or been taken down, it seems they are correct. > > -- > -- > Gavin Andresen >
Quoted text (1 line)
>>>But money is attached to life and not liberty
I can't truly express in this email exactly how much I personally disagree with that statement/belief because I don't think the dev mailing list is the appropriate forum for such philosophical discussions.
I will say this, though: I think you've missed much of the point of Bitcoin -- which "monetary or economic liberty" might perfectly describe -- and, I sincerely hope that proposals such as yours never gain ANY traction in this community.
As far as I'm concerned, your ideas are the antithesis of this entire experiment.
I'd be glad to have this discussion over a beer and hookah any time, but I won't take up any more space or time with it here.
Oliver
PS: sorry everyone! I just couldn't let this one go without comment... I'll go back to my usual lurking and learning now. :)
I Truly respect your opinions.
Prabhat Kumar Singh
On Fri, Aug 28, 2015 at 12:25 AM, Oliver Petruzel <opetruzel@gmail•com> wrote:
Quoted text (22 lines)
> >>>But money is attached to life and not liberty > > I can't truly express in this email exactly how much I personally disagree > with that statement/belief because I don't think the dev mailing list is > the appropriate forum for such philosophical discussions. > > I will say this, though: I think you've missed much of the point of > Bitcoin -- which "monetary or economic liberty" might perfectly describe -- > and, I sincerely hope that proposals such as yours never gain ANY traction > in this community. > > As far as I'm concerned, your ideas are the antithesis of this entire > experiment. > > I'd be glad to have this discussion over a beer and hookah any time, but I > won't take up any more space or time with it here. > > Oliver > > PS: sorry everyone! I just couldn't let this one go without comment... > I'll go back to my usual lurking and learning now. :) >
Prabhat,
You write about OFAC, KYC, and AML. The *Office of Foreign Assets Control* (*OFAC*) is a financial intelligence <https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Financial_intelligence> and enforcement agency of the U.S. government charged with planning and execution of economic and trade sanctions <https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Economic_sanctions> in support of U.S. national security <https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/National_Security_of_the_United_States> and foreign policy <https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Foreign_policy_of_the_United_States> objectives. KYC means "Know Your Customer" which is something every intelligent businessman does when his deals are significant. Support for "KYC" is built into reality and needs no qualification, compliance, or control. AML means "Anti-Money-Laundering" which smacks of overreach. Laundering money serves to hide behaviors that authorities dislike, many of which are actually helping the world. Neomoney says it best <http://neomoney.net/?p=426>: "Indeed, money laundering describes a wide range of activities that are undertaken by innocent participants in the economy. Authorities’ growing expectation of a right to violate our privacy to enforce their laws, and an expectation that we do nothing to protect ourselves from that violation of privacy, lie at the heart of money laundering propaganda."
So your work comes across as that of someone who has been duped into doing the bidding of the largest and most successful criminal organization on Earth. I do not accuse you of being deceived because no one can be blamed for the damage done to them by such a powerful parasite. I wish only to open your eyes, or, at least what worked for me, your ears <http://peacerevolution.podomatic.com/>.
No.
On 08/27/2015 01:10 AM, prabhat via bitcoin-dev wrote:
Quoted text (15 lines)
> Hi, > > I am proposing to create a AML-KYC module to control the network > and also qualify use cases in OFAC compliant way. Here is the > attached doc. > > Please provide your feedback and suggestions. > > Best, Prabhat Kumar Singh > > > _______________________________________________ bitcoin-dev mailing > list bitcoin-dev@lists•linuxfoundation•org > https://lists.linuxfoundation.org/mailman/listinfo/bitcoin-dev >
- -- http://abis.io ~ "a protocol concept to enable decentralization and expansion of a giving economy, and a new social good" https://keybase.io/odinn
Well,
On 08/27/2015 06:39 AM, prabhat via bitcoin-dev wrote:
Quoted text (3 lines)
> Fine point. > > So where is the solution? What to do?
You could study bitcoin some more and understand what it is instead of proposing to "implement AML-KYC in bitcoin" which shows vast ignorance about it.
That's probably what you should do.
Quoted text (37 lines)
> > Prabhat Kumar Singh > > Prabhat Kumar Singh > > > On Thu, Aug 27, 2015 at 6:58 PM, Gavin Andresen > <gavinandresen@gmail•com <mailto:gavinandresen@gmail.com>> wrote: > > Have you talked with anybody at the Bitcoin Foundation about this > proposal? > > As Chief Scientist of the Foundation, I am strongly opposed to any > proposal that puts the Foundation in a position of centralized > authority, so this is unacceptable: "The Bitcoin Foundation will > act as fair play party and enforcement body to control the misuse > of vast financial powers which bitcoin has." > > The idea that a central organization can be trusted to keep > secrets secure is just fundamentally wrong. In the very recent past > we have seen government organizations fail in that task (the NSA, > the OPM) and we see commercial organizations that SHOULD be highly > motivated to do a good job also fail (e.g. the Ashley Madison > leak). > > Even if it were technically possible, I would be opposed because > decentralization is a bedrock principle of Bitcoin. > > -- -- Gavin Andresen > > > > > _______________________________________________ bitcoin-dev mailing > list bitcoin-dev@lists•linuxfoundation•org > https://lists.linuxfoundation.org/mailman/listinfo/bitcoin-dev >
- -- http://abis.io ~ "a protocol concept to enable decentralization and expansion of a giving economy, and a new social good" https://keybase.io/odinn
I've done some work in this area. see http://coinvalidation.com/ it's currently shelved due to lack of legal and regulatory framework.
1. this should not be directly implemented on the protocol level. I believe its Jeff Garzik who once said "stolen bitcoins is a legal problem, not a technical one." Legal problems are not technical problems.
2. it is the responsibility of company and individuals to answer questions. example, stolen bitcoins gets send to address X, and address X is a payment address of company Y. it is company Y's responsibility to answer to corresponding agencies responsible. What actions comes out of that is yet to be determent.
other examples such as, you are using a wallet app, and sending bitcoin payments to a known malicious address. ( e.g. crypto-locker or other malware address that replaces the output address.), does the wallet app warn its users?
Again, while these are not technical problems, they will need answers eventually. I'll be happy to discuss further off this mailing list as it is off-topic.
On Thu, Aug 27, 2015 at 10:00 PM, odinn via bitcoin-dev < bitcoin-dev@lists•linuxfoundation•org> wrote:
Quoted text (43 lines)
> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- > Hash: SHA1 > > No. > > On 08/27/2015 01:10 AM, prabhat via bitcoin-dev wrote: > > Hi, > > > > I am proposing to create a AML-KYC module to control the network > > and also qualify use cases in OFAC compliant way. Here is the > > attached doc. > > > > Please provide your feedback and suggestions. > > > > Best, Prabhat Kumar Singh > > > > > > _______________________________________________ bitcoin-dev mailing > > list bitcoin-dev@lists•linuxfoundation•org > > https://lists.linuxfoundation.org/mailman/listinfo/bitcoin-dev > > > > - -- > http://abis.io ~ > "a protocol concept to enable decentralization > and expansion of a giving economy, and a new social good" > https://keybase.io/odinn > -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- > Version: GnuPG v1 > > iQEcBAEBAgAGBQJV38DGAAoJEGxwq/inSG8CkYkIAJwHOnjesbq+UHogUkGJsuph > 2ipSIcBEzbeVH8fQ2sij5jKULE0n8J7K/DtfzzRJj+IiaYB1Ecjl0kLVQ0ug6T/8 > p5iuGQ2fvt1tMOy9+ptZbOZhtjUTWWSMqmFgsPkh5s/uGHeKy/jBjYsZv4FZ57Hm > DUUvGYIdaGQ2eYm4y4dLnvI0T5WFQvf0Vs4wvWZdKvD5oliSwGy4KNVIxlcGya8w > FPYaDe8q0rN5Aqp4V2jjfuF4KBC8dwHa9dyHTfSPA43I1qbcIVraSdJg1lCJ/bXh > rFz+MXcGmsxxzHMbv6C4y+YSET2TPuNUs4w6MVw2ZO0lYe1suWYeYvfccQA1+Uk= > =17NP > -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- > _______________________________________________ > bitcoin-dev mailing list > bitcoin-dev@lists•linuxfoundation•org > https://lists.linuxfoundation.org/mailman/listinfo/bitcoin-dev >
2^256 x _NO_
On 8/28/2015 5:00 AM, odinn via bitcoin-dev wrote:
Quoted text (13 lines)
> No. > > On 08/27/2015 01:10 AM, prabhat via bitcoin-dev wrote: >> Hi, > >> I am proposing to create a AML-KYC module to control the network >> and also qualify use cases in OFAC compliant way. Here is the >> attached doc. > >> Please provide your feedback and suggestions. > >> Best, Prabhat Kumar Singh >
No No
On Aug 30, 2015, 14:47, at 14:47, s7r via bitcoin-dev <bitcoin-dev@lists•linuxfoundation•org> wrote:
Quoted text (34 lines)
>-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- >Hash: SHA256 > >2^256 x _NO_ > >On 8/28/2015 5:00 AM, odinn via bitcoin-dev wrote: >> No. >> >> On 08/27/2015 01:10 AM, prabhat via bitcoin-dev wrote: >>> Hi, >> >>> I am proposing to create a AML-KYC module to control the network >>> and also qualify use cases in OFAC compliant way. Here is the >>> attached doc. >> >>> Please provide your feedback and suggestions. >> >>> Best, Prabhat Kumar Singh >> >-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- >Version: GnuPG v2.0.22 (MingW32) > >iQEcBAEBCAAGBQJV4vtvAAoJEIN/pSyBJlsRLhgIANLoG2/NNuc+sAMZnSojWQf7 >UxJeOLFE7XXOCwDeUPfbgJ6JxYMTQwqT/mOAAPkHoAwm+k7SHUy+MuxTGnlui4n7 >hKtRPdZ1ibYeBLV3CBQb9PEN2Ma7Djjh2LtBcbueF19w3j95NOSnTl9P3jOfc8kW >x2rAEoZFJeJUOE/prbedrzQ8wSHm9ekt4BXiDnUaR3Xvvp/NuVZ9+eWJT+lWS4fR >16zFQZPMYP6o2evnhluAJCTvP0q0Imz6d4I0Mryi2hLDX964sLpxP0tK+ASbtzwV >CknfKeSjwpZ116MMDSfgnya17AYc0o6RWl6XjAgciPAMJFQnhhSKzLNV9898AT0= >=It5v >-----END PGP SIGNATURE----- >_______________________________________________ >bitcoin-dev mailing list >bitcoin-dev@lists•linuxfoundation•org >https://lists.linuxfoundation.org/mailman/listinfo/bitcoin-dev
Sorry to be off-topic but SNR of the mailing list is really getting ridiculous.
Stop trolling and feeding the trolls.
Before you click "send", remember that your message will be sent to the inbox of hundreds or thousands of people.
Ref: http://lists.linuxfoundation.org/pipermail/bitcoin-dev/2015-August/010463.html
Vinyas via bitcoin-dev 於 2015-08-30 11:16 寫到:
Quoted text (9 lines)
> No No > On Aug 30, 2015, at 14:47, s7r via bitcoin-dev > <bitcoin-dev@lists•linuxfoundation•org> wrote: > >> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- >> Hash: SHA256 >> >> 2^256 x _NO_ >>
Thanks for nice decentralized discussion. This wasn't and isn't a parody. Mining is insecure (for society) and security is passive. All the raised points are proven by esteemed members themselves.
Closing from my side. Thanks, God Bless, Bye
Prabhat Kumar Singh
On Sun, Aug 30, 2015 at 6:17 PM, s7r <s7r@sky-ip•org> wrote:
Quoted text (31 lines)
> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- > Hash: SHA256 > > 2^256 x _NO_ > > On 8/28/2015 5:00 AM, odinn via bitcoin-dev wrote: > > No. > > > > On 08/27/2015 01:10 AM, prabhat via bitcoin-dev wrote: > >> Hi, > > > >> I am proposing to create a AML-KYC module to control the network > >> and also qualify use cases in OFAC compliant way. Here is the > >> attached doc. > > > >> Please provide your feedback and suggestions. > > > >> Best, Prabhat Kumar Singh > > > -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- > Version: GnuPG v2.0.22 (MingW32) > > iQEcBAEBCAAGBQJV4vtvAAoJEIN/pSyBJlsRLhgIANLoG2/NNuc+sAMZnSojWQf7 > UxJeOLFE7XXOCwDeUPfbgJ6JxYMTQwqT/mOAAPkHoAwm+k7SHUy+MuxTGnlui4n7 > hKtRPdZ1ibYeBLV3CBQb9PEN2Ma7Djjh2LtBcbueF19w3j95NOSnTl9P3jOfc8kW > x2rAEoZFJeJUOE/prbedrzQ8wSHm9ekt4BXiDnUaR3Xvvp/NuVZ9+eWJT+lWS4fR > 16zFQZPMYP6o2evnhluAJCTvP0q0Imz6d4I0Mryi2hLDX964sLpxP0tK+ASbtzwV > CknfKeSjwpZ116MMDSfgnya17AYc0o6RWl6XjAgciPAMJFQnhhSKzLNV9898AT0= > =It5v > -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- >