CipherTrace and Shyft introduce solution for strict FATF anti-terrorism regulations

Thanks to CipherTrace's crypto intelligence and Shyft's identity solutions, exchanges can now keep their users' identities safe. The FATF rolled out the 'Travel Rule' that threatens to take away a lot of privacy features from exchanges, but a solution is here with smart contracts and cryptographic access controls to safeguard private info. Is this a step in the right direction for the industry? I think it is.

I can see why people are upset about this because it still seems like KYC but these two pro-crypto companies are quite active in protecting people's privacy and the industry in general. If they didn't I don't think Ciphertrace and shyft would be thriving and trusted by big exchanges like binance.

As far as I know this company has raised so much fund in the beginning of this year, around $15 million. So maybe this is where all the money will be pour to, to help lots of companies around the crypto sphere specially in cases about hacks or stolen funds. But yes, for sure this might turn off some Bitcoin maximalist as it really really go against the very basic of crypto general, which is decentralisation and (psuedo) anonymity. So let's see how the community will react though, and I do hope that this is really a solution for the growing issues in cryptos.

It would really be against on the main purpose why crypto is being created but getting rid of scams and frauds is on the line then community might consider or do understand this one but it isn't still a sure thing on what would be the reactions or insights regarding on this matter but on my side this is really a helpful one and might increase adoption further more when they do saw some sort of increased security.

From what I have read Ciphertrace has been really proactive in the crypto community and helping be the bridge between crypto enthusiasts and the government

I see it as a very sinister technology. It's a trojan horse to create a parallel system of state sanctioned wallet providers. Where by they then ban open source wallets. If you can't remove your keys from a proprietary wallet and put it in a paper wallet it ain't your keys.

what makes you think they would ban open source wallets? there would be significant outcry over that. such prohibition goes to the heart of free speech. it would set sweeping precedents that code is no longer covered by free speech protections. that would completely cripple innovation. i believe governments will take a more nuanced approach than that, if only to protect their (tax revenue bearing) technology sectors.

Can't say I completely understand how any of those two solutions work, but far as I know Ciphertrace isn't exactly about open source -- they're a for profit company so there's that -- but this could be a genuine effort to effect some kind of pullback. They're into private blockchains, and they're into anti money laundering, so that means they clearly require that everything can be traced. This alone means full privacy cannot be achieved because trust is still going to be centred somewhere. I think what samdan is saying could prove to be true some day and has some merit. But you're also right and FATF + governments will eventually be forced to acquiesce. They want that tax revenue too.

This, exactly. They are framing the issue as if sharing identity data between exchanges is the only problem. The real problem is the elaborate database exchanges will be building (and reporting to governments) full of everyone's transactions. These exchanges already have your KYC. The proof-of-knowledge protocol they are promoting is just a layer over the top. Once the police come knocking at the door of one of the exchanges, your entire financial history will be revealed to them.

I don't really understand why you would think that or why they would seize your wallet. I would imagine they would just locate it back to the user via KYC through exchanges