List of Hosting Providers That Accept Cryptocurrencies or Cash as Payment

General Tor and Anonymity Talk
61

Thanks for your response, unfortunately, that isn’t how KYC regulations work.

In the UK for instance, where we are registered, there is not currently, and are not future plans for KYC enforcement on hosting providers.

I understand why you’d think what you do, keeping in mind, it is based upon no real facts, just the assumption that we’d force a customer to undergo KYC, as perhaps a tactic to get them out of a price lock etc or whatever.

If you’re a regular user, who pays with crypto, you won’t ever have KYC issues. UNLESS - you lock yourself out of your account, etc - then KYC is needed to prove who you are, as an enterprise host, we need to adhere to certain restrictions to protect our users as our services contain highly sensitive information that could and probably would cause rapid harm if unauthorized access is granted.

If we get a court order, then yes, of course we would, but I can assure you, MOST of the time, if we get a court order, it’s because you’ve likely been doing stuff we don’t allow such as malware distribution etc.

But yes, all in all, KYC is something that would nearly never occur for the average user.

But once again, you’re essentially “larping“ about regulation, sadly, that isn’t a thing as of now for this sort of thing in our region, and court orders can happen anywhere, even in notoriously private regions.

*sorry for the long post, it’s a fun topic*

1 Like
62

The definition of a regular user is not yours to decide, the UK government authoritatively classifies it, your business merely echoes it. In addition, the third-party payment processor being used by your business is currently CoinPayments, which is subject to the cryptoasset regulation regime:

Your business has already delegated the financial responsibility elsewhere, so your claim is fundamentally broken because your business cannot call the shots.

Your claim rings hollow when the Investigatory Powers Act overrides any definition you provide against vulnerable, but legitimate demographics, such as activists, journalists and whistleblowers. If the UK government asserts its powers as necessary for security purposes, even when your ToS/AUP explicitly specifies unacceptable narrow use cases, you will be legally compelled to broaden the use case in practice or risk obstruction of justice.

I actively practice adversarial analysis and deep supply chain provenance audits, which is how I was able to maintain the list of hosting providers on the Whonix Wiki for over a year in the first place. If you want to triple down for entertainment purposes, I can continue to publicly expose your business’ fragile position further, so that our discussion serves as a textbook example of a business claiming sovereignty when it never had any to begin with.

63

Moderation comment:

An interesting discussion.

Please move this discussion off-site to a suitable third-party discussion place.

2 Likes