I need your advice on AML assessment

[GODBTCETH]

As an individual group, I want to know what software everyone uses to conduct AML anti-money laundering compliance assessment when acquiring personal crypto assets. I used https://amlbot.com/ to conduct asset AML compliance assessment before. It can display the risk details of the queried assets. The AML risk index score for crypto assets can range from 10%-100%, which eliminates all dangerous assets when I acquire assets. But now it cancels the detailed assessment content of the AML personal version, and can only display the AML risk of the queried asset address<50%/>50%. This AML scoring strategy makes me confused. Now only the enterprise version can conduct detailed asset AML assessment content, and we are just an individual group without a company license. I can't accurately confirm whether the assets I am going to acquire are completely clean. I don't want to lose my assets because of a small mistake. If you have an accurate AML assessment system, please recommend it to me. What I am looking for is a detailed AML assessment system that supports individual group use.

Thank you for your advice, it is very important to me.

[Pmalek]

Many people in this forum don't buy into the idea of AML assessments and classifying bitcoin in different groups based on their "dirtiness." Each bitcoin is the same as any other bitcoin on protocol-level. Anything else is just nonsense created by malicious institutions and their government buddies meant to control you, legally steal from you, and hold back bitcoin adoption as much as possible.

If you believe the "dirty" bitcoin hysteria, purchase your coins from a CEX and be willing to accept their terms and rules. Sell your coins back to this exchange when you are done. Avoid mixers, privacy tools, and online gambling if you decide to go this route.

If you don't care about it, purchase any bitcoin P2P or from no-KYC exchanges. You can find several such services on KYCnot.me. Use bitcoin the way you want to, without a malicious third-party setting the rules, and sell/swap them again P2P or via no-KYC exchanges.

[OmegaStarScream]

You should keep in mind that not all exchanges use the same KYT (Know your transaction) software. Some might use AMLBot, ChainAnalysis, or something else. And even then (and I'm guessing here) given that the "reports" are based on percentages and not just "suspicious" vs "non suspicious" I would imagine that not all exchanges have the same level of strictness.

So if AMLBot detects that your address is clean for example[1], another exchange might have other sources included and could find your address as dirty. Or, maybe both solutions detect that the funds are 40% from a gambling site or darknet, but then exchange A take that as "suspicious" and requires you to provide proof of funds while exchange B wouldn't.

Could you explain the type of transaction you're going to make? Is it simply fiat vs crypto? If so, maybe it's wiser to just use a proper P2P exchange. That way the other party is forced to deposit the funds into the exchange, and if there is something wrong with the funds, he should deal with the issue, not you.

[1] https://amlbot.com/attachment/AMLBot_report_example.pdf

[LoyceV]

Many people in this forum don't buy into the idea of AML assessments and classifying bitcoin in different groups based on their "dirtiness." Each bitcoin is the same as any other bitcoin on protocol-level. Anything else is just nonsense created by malicious institutions and their government buddies meant to control you, legally steal from you, and hold back bitcoin adoption as much as possible.

Even worse: it's completely arbitrary. But don't worry, here's a list of all clean Bitcoin addresses. And here's a list of all dirty addresses. Or maybe it was the other way around, I keep forgetting

@OP: do you also check AML records when you receive cash from someone? Of course not, money is fungible. Without fungibility, money can't exist, and the same goes for Bitcoin.

[hugeblack]

Ask each service before depositing, if there is no answer try another service or avoid KYCed service.

To reduce the possibility of your coins being restricted as high risk send them to several addresses before depositing. for example:
Your coins --> New wallet address --> New wallet address --> New wallet address --> New wallet address --> exchange service you want to deposit to, with random fees.

[GODBTCETH]

Many people in this forum don't buy into the idea of AML assessments and classifying bitcoin in different groups based on their "dirtiness." Each bitcoin is the same as any other bitcoin on protocol-level. Anything else is just nonsense created by malicious institutions and their government buddies meant to control you, legally steal from you, and hold back bitcoin adoption as much as possible.

If you believe the "dirty" bitcoin hysteria, purchase your coins from a CEX and be willing to accept their terms and rules. Sell your coins back to this exchange when you are done. Avoid mixers, privacy tools, and online gambling if you decide to go this route.

If you don't care about it, purchase any bitcoin P2P or from no-KYC exchanges. You can find several such services on KYCnot.me. Use bitcoin the way you want to, without a malicious third-party setting the rules, and sell/swap them again P2P or via no-KYC exchanges.

I understand what you mean. The reason why I am a personal crypto service provider instead of an enterprise-level cryptocurrency exchanger is to provide the greatest privacy protection for my customers. If I am sure that someone's cryptocurrency does not meet the fixed standards, I will not purchase it, instead of reporting it to certain departments because they just want to plunder it. But I need to have no problems exchanging my cryptocurrency for legal currency, so I need such a system. Even if I use a decentralized exchange for trading, someone will still detain my funds through AML and ask me to provide personal privacy information of myself and my trading customers. I am very angry. I still want to express my gratitude for your advice.

You should keep in mind that not all exchanges use the same KYT (Know your transaction) software. Some might use AMLBot, ChainAnalysis, or something else. And even then (and I'm guessing here) given that the "reports" are based on percentages and not just "suspicious" vs "non suspicious" I would imagine that not all exchanges have the same level of strictness.

So if AMLBot detects that your address is clean for example[1], another exchange might have other sources included and could find your address as dirty. Or, maybe both solutions detect that the funds are 40% from a gambling site or darknet, but then exchange A take that as "suspicious" and requires you to provide proof of funds while exchange B wouldn't.

Could you explain the type of transaction you're going to make? Is it simply fiat vs crypto? If so, maybe it's wiser to just use a proper P2P exchange. That way the other party is forced to deposit the funds into the exchange, and if there is something wrong with the funds, he should deal with the issue, not you.

[1] https://amlbot.com/attachment/AMLBot_report_example.pdf

My trading model is that I acquire clients’ crypto assets and then transfer these crypto assets to exchanges for fiat currency. I understand that different exchanges may use different AML systems or use multiple AML systems at the same time. What I have to do is to ensure that the funds I receive are compliant. I will not use only one exchange to exchange fiat currency. It is unwise to use only one exchange.

[LoyceV]

If I am sure that someone's cryptocurrency does not meet the fixed standards

What if it gets marked as "bad" the day after you bought it? And that's just one of the problems with the notion of taint: it's arbitrary and not transparent.

Let me put it this way: I don't do business with drug dealers, but I can't help it if the banknotes in my wallet have been used by drug dealers before*. And I don't have to worry about it, because money is fungible. Without fungibility, we'd be back to barter transactions, and even then, you'd have to worry if the sheep you received in exchange for a pig might have been stolen.

*This is actually quite likely, 90% of all banknotes contain traces of cocaine.

[GODBTCETH]

Ask each service before depositing, if there is no answer try another service or avoid KYCed service.

To reduce the possibility of your coins being restricted as high risk send them to several addresses before depositing. for example:
Your coins --> New wallet address --> New wallet address --> New wallet address --> New wallet address --> exchange service you want to deposit to, with random fees.

Thank you, I will try your method. But how can I verify that the funds will not be withheld by the exchange?

If I am sure that someone's cryptocurrency does not meet the fixed standards

What if it gets marked as "bad" the day after you bought it? And that's just one of the problems with the notion of taint: it's arbitrary and not transparent.

Let me put it this way: I don't do business with drug dealers, but I can't help it if the banknotes in my wallet have been used by drug dealers before*. And I don't have to worry about it, because money is fungible. Without fungibility, we'd be back to barter transactions, and even then, you'd have to worry if the sheep you received in exchange for a pig might have been stolen.

*This is actually quite likely, 90% of all banknotes contain traces of cocaine.

I understand what you mean. There is no completely pure money or coin. I will review every asset I acquire and then transfer it to the exchange. If the other party's wallet enters unclean coins the next day or at other times, it will not affect me because I acquired it before that. So the AML assessment I need needs to be instant, with almost no delay, or within 1-2 hours.

[MusaMohamed]

Ask each service before depositing, if there is no answer try another service or avoid KYCed service.

I don't think proactively asking them can help, because as centralized exchanges, they have Terms of Service that stay on their sides. They can write some vague phrases in their terms on AML, that will be used in case they need to defend themselves than protect their customers.

You can ask, but in my opinion, it won't be helpful for you.

I agree with you about using no-KYC exchanges, it's safer.
Bitcoin Q&A: Blacklists, Taint, and Wallet Fingerprinting
Why KYC is extremely dangerous – and useless

To reduce the possibility of your coins being restricted as high risk send them to several addresses before depositing. for example:
Your coins --> New wallet address --> New wallet address --> New wallet address --> New wallet address --> exchange service you want to deposit to, with random fees.

Avoid combining inputs or send round number or all bitcoin in that wallet to another address. It's not good for privacy too.

[ABCbits]

--snip--

My trading model is that I acquire clients’ crypto assets and then transfer these crypto assets to exchanges for fiat currency. I understand that different exchanges may use different AML systems or use multiple AML systems at the same time. What I have to do is to ensure that the funds I receive are compliant. I will not use only one exchange to exchange fiat currency. It is unwise to use only one exchange.

You can't be 100% sure the funds you received are compliant. FYI, some major cryptocurrency exchange (such as Coinbase, Binance and KuCoin) got fined by U.S. government about violating money laundering law, even though they already check deposited coin. It's worth to mention Coinbase is known for very strict checking, even compared with other centralized cryptocurrency exchange.

[stadus]

As an individual group, I want to know what software everyone uses to conduct AML anti-money laundering compliance assessment when acquiring personal crypto assets.

I think it only gets complicated if you’re acquiring crypto assets from someone or an entity that isn’t regulated. Going through AML checks isn’t mandatory, but it does help minimize risks by ensuring the assets you acquire are clean, so I undertand your concern.

How about buying directly from an exchange? That’s a much easier and safer option IMO. You can deposit fiat, purchase crypto, and if you plan to hold it long-term, transfer it to your hardware wallet for added security. This way, you can be confident it’s safe because exchanges already have systems in place for regulatory compliance to ensure the coins in their platform are clean.

[Smartprofit]

In my opinion, the AML process is a tool to destroy and discredit Bitcoin. Bitcoin is money that does not need the support or approval of a third party.

By insisting on the legitimacy of the AML process, regulators and the organizations they control are attacking the very essence of Bitcoin. They are saying, “Without our approval, Bitcoin cannot be recognized as real, genuine, legitimate Bitcoin.” But in reality, any Bitcoin that exists in nature is real, genuine, and legitimate.

The right thing to do is to ignore the AML process. If everyone did that, we would get rid of a lot of problems.

Of course, you can do it differently. You can buy Bitcoin from an officially approved cryptocurrency exchange (like Coinbase), but as rightly noted above, even that does not guarantee that you will not have problems in the future.

[Pmalek]

Ask each service before depositing, if there is no answer try another service or avoid KYCed service.

Exchanges will never tell you anything about it. More precisely, the customer support staff you get to talk to have no idea, and the little information they know, they aren't going to share with you. I did an experiment some time ago where I asked support agents of CEXs what they consider "tainted" bitcoin and what kind of coins they reject. As expected, I didn't discover anything useful besides the usual generic replies of how the exchange is interested in protecting all clients and their money and only exists to serve us, their loyal customers .

In essence, they want you to deposit your coins. If their "research" discovers anything wrong with them, they will let you know by freezing your account and asking for more information.

The right thing to do is to ignore the AML process. If everyone did that, we would get rid of a lot of problems.

You can still get caught in the middle of it if you use centralized exchanges that make you play by their rules. Then, if you want your money, you'll have to comply. The right thing to do is to not deposit to CEXs at all.

[freedomgo]

In my opinion, the AML process is a tool to destroy and discredit Bitcoin. Bitcoin is money that does not need the support or approval of a third party.

Sure, you can still make transactions without AML, but OP is just being cautious to ensure that the Bitcoin or other coins they plan to acquire don’t come from questionable sources or have any shady links. Whether we like it or not, AML is already deeply involved in the crypto industry, and they’re tightening regulations as scams continue to rise year after year.

By insisting on the legitimacy of the AML process, regulators and the organizations they control are attacking the very essence of Bitcoin. They are saying, “Without our approval, Bitcoin cannot be recognized as real, genuine, legitimate Bitcoin.” But in reality, any Bitcoin that exists in nature is real, genuine, and legitimate.

The right thing to do is to ignore the AML process. If everyone did that, we would get rid of a lot of problems.

Of course, you can do it differently. You can buy Bitcoin from an officially approved cryptocurrency exchange (like Coinbase), but as rightly noted above, even that does not guarantee that you will not have problems in the future.

For me, I’ve been ignoring KYC, but I understand there are people who prefer to play it safe. Those systems are in place because they serve a purpose. At the end of the day, it’s just a matter of preference, not something that’s strictly mandatory or compulsory.

[alexeyneu]

if you'd lost money on aml several times like i did you more or less know when tx made to you may trigger it. And you're really screwed up after you'd seen this.  If you need cash you have no options. Either you'll lost money or dude who agree to do p2p . These coins once will be landed into cex anyway. So i just do not use btc any more.

just a record of those cases:
https://asktom.cf/index.php?topic=5392940.0

[Smartprofit]

In my opinion, the AML process is a tool to destroy and discredit Bitcoin. Bitcoin is money that does not need the support or approval of a third party.

Sure, you can still make transactions without AML, but OP is just being cautious to ensure that the Bitcoin or other coins they plan to acquire don’t come from questionable sources or have any shady links. Whether we like it or not, AML is already deeply involved in the crypto industry, and they’re tightening regulations as scams continue to rise year after year.

By insisting on the legitimacy of the AML process, regulators and the organizations they control are attacking the very essence of Bitcoin. They are saying, “Without our approval, Bitcoin cannot be recognized as real, genuine, legitimate Bitcoin.” But in reality, any Bitcoin that exists in nature is real, genuine, and legitimate.

The right thing to do is to ignore the AML process. If everyone did that, we would get rid of a lot of problems.

Of course, you can do it differently. You can buy Bitcoin from an officially approved cryptocurrency exchange (like Coinbase), but as rightly noted above, even that does not guarantee that you will not have problems in the future.

For me, I’ve been ignoring KYC, but I understand there are people who prefer to play it safe. Those systems are in place because they serve a purpose. At the end of the day, it’s just a matter of preference, not something that’s strictly mandatory or compulsory.

Of course, you can go through KYC and AML procedures, but you need to understand that civil rights are difficult to obtain and very easy to lose.

Today you go through KYC and AML procedures, and tomorrow you will be forced to use CBDC, the day after tomorrow you will be given a social rating, and then you will find yourself in a digital concentration camp ...

And each time there will be a reasonable explanation for this - "We protect you from fraud and crime!"

Those who now require KYC and AML procedures are insatiable when it comes to controlling people and their money. The ideal option for them would be the following - people do not own any property (including money), people can use some types of property (including money) subject to complete loyalty and unconditional compliance with the established rules. In case of violation of any established rule, a person is automatically alienated from property (including money) - because neither property nor money belong to a person (he only uses them).  We hardly want to live in such a dystopia, but KYC and AML procedures are a step in this direction...

[BlackHatCoiner]

In addition to what has already been said, I want to add that exchanges rely on blockchain analysis software for the labeling of "tainted" coins. They do not discriminate based on their criteria, but on the criteria employed by the chain analysis companies that sell this software to them, almost all of which are government funded. Their methodology is evidently flawed and relies on false positives: https://asktom.cf/index.php?topic=5464886.0.

Just to emphasize this is not only an ethical concern but also a matter of scientifically and objectively flawed metrics.

[freedomgo]

Of course, you can go through KYC and AML procedures, but you need to understand that civil rights are difficult to obtain and very easy to lose.

Today you go through KYC and AML procedures, and tomorrow you will be forced to use CBDC, the day after tomorrow you will be given a social rating, and then you will find yourself in a digital concentration camp ...

And each time there will be a reasonable explanation for this - "We protect you from fraud and crime!"

Those who now require KYC and AML procedures are insatiable when it comes to controlling people and their money. The ideal option for them would be the following - people do not own any property (including money), people can use some types of property (including money) subject to complete loyalty and unconditional compliance with the established rules. In case of violation of any established rule, a person is automatically alienated from property (including money) - because neither property nor money belong to a person (he only uses them).  We hardly want to live in such a dystopia, but KYC and AML procedures are a step in this direction...

I completely understand your sentiment, however, that’s not the reality we’re living in now. The governments will always push for centralization, which goes against the very purpose of using Bitcoin or crypto in general. The questions and discussions around these topics are based on the actual procedures governments are enforcing now. We can decide to comply or not, but we should always be aware of the consequences of non-compliance, and I know we want to protect our privacy, however, if there’s no option left, sometimes we’re forced to follow the system that’s already in place. though, it’s not ideal, but it’s the reality.

[Smartprofit]

Of course, you can go through KYC and AML procedures, but you need to understand that civil rights are difficult to obtain and very easy to lose.

Today you go through KYC and AML procedures, and tomorrow you will be forced to use CBDC, the day after tomorrow you will be given a social rating, and then you will find yourself in a digital concentration camp ...

And each time there will be a reasonable explanation for this - "We protect you from fraud and crime!"

Those who now require KYC and AML procedures are insatiable when it comes to controlling people and their money. The ideal option for them would be the following - people do not own any property (including money), people can use some types of property (including money) subject to complete loyalty and unconditional compliance with the established rules. In case of violation of any established rule, a person is automatically alienated from property (including money) - because neither property nor money belong to a person (he only uses them).  We hardly want to live in such a dystopia, but KYC and AML procedures are a step in this direction...

I completely understand your sentiment, however, that’s not the reality we’re living in now. The governments will always push for centralization, which goes against the very purpose of using Bitcoin or crypto in general. The questions and discussions around these topics are based on the actual procedures governments are enforcing now. We can decide to comply or not, but we should always be aware of the consequences of non-compliance, and I know we want to protect our privacy, however, if there’s no option left, sometimes we’re forced to follow the system that’s already in place. though, it’s not ideal, but it’s the reality.

In my opinion, most entities that seem important to us are unreal.

Our bodies, our planet, the sun, animals, birds, plants, nature, physical laws, mathematics, etc. are real.

Unreal abstractions are things that are important to us, such as states, money, corporations, legal laws, social rules, etc. Since humans are essentially highly social animals, unreal abstractions that are the subject of agreement between large numbers of people are very important to them.

For example, humans die less often from hunger, disasters, and attacks by wild animals (real attacks) than from heart attacks and strokes associated with all sorts of social interspecies conflicts.

Bitcoin is a real entity, since it is mined with real computing devices (ASICs), mining requires electricity, and the emission of bitcoins is based on mathematics.  But KYC and AML procedures are absolutely unrealistic abstract rules, essentially the arbitrariness of certain (even influential) individuals.

What to do with all this?
First, realize that KYC and AML are unrealistic, abstract rules.
Second, tell other people about it.
Third, use every opportunity to avoid these procedures, as this harms not only you personally, but all Bitcoin network users. There is a saying - it is better to be hard sand in the mechanism of doomsday than oil grease.