Slashdot Mirror


EU Plans To Create Database of Bitcoin Users With Identities and Wallet Addresses (softpedia.com)

An anonymous reader writes from a report via Softpedia: "The European Commission is proposing the creation of a database that will hold information on users of virtual currencies," reports Softpedia. "The database will record data on the user's real world identity, along with all associated wallet addresses." The database will be made available to financial investigation agencies in order to track down users behind suspicious operations. The creation of this database is part of a regulatory push that the EU got rolling after the Paris November 2015 terror attacks, and which it officially put forward in February 2016, and later approved at the start of July 2016. Legally, this is an attempt to reform the Anti-Money Laundering Directive (AMLD). The current draft is available here. The current AMLD draft reads: "The report shall be accompanied, if necessary, by appropriate proposals, including, where appropriate, with respect to virtual currencies, empowerments to set-up and maintain a central database registering users' identities and wallet addresses accessible to FIUs, as well as self-declaration forms for the use of virtual currency users."

55 of 130 comments (clear)

  1. Really? by Anon-Admin · · Score: 5, Insightful

    The suggested process for using bitcoin is to create a new wallet address for each transaction.

    They will never be able to keep up with it.

    I guess this is what happens when a bunch of people who dont understand the technology try to regulate it.

    1. Re:Really? by Entrope · · Score: 5, Interesting

      You overlooked the "self-declaration" forms for people using virtual currencies. That translates to making it illegal to use Bitcoin (etc.) without telling the government about your wallet(s) -- probably upon pain of hefty fines. You might not get caught if you only keep funds in Bitcoin form, but if you ever try to redeem it for goods or services in Europe, be prepared to fess up.

    2. Re:Really? by Dunbal · · Score: 2

      What exactly is stopping you from sitting on a pile of bitcoins, and creating a new, declared wallet specifically for any particular "withdrawal"... This is about as stupid as politicians get, but then again...

      --
      Seven puppies were harmed during the making of this post.
    3. Re:Really? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 3, Insightful

      because it leaves a trail. once they have one point they can then connect you to everything that flows in or out or any other wallet you have transactions with. It is the inherent problem with bitcoin, it is all well and good till you actually need to use it for something in the real world.

    4. Re:Really? by Dunbal · · Score: 2, Interesting

      But you're assuming - or THEY are assuming - that every place that bitcoin came from is from a wallet in a country subject to their silly law. What can they do if the trail is from a wallet that was created in Panama, for example? Prove that Panama to me is an illegitimate transaction AND that I actually own the wallet in Panama. Trivial to set up with VPN's and/or friends/relatives who are actually outside your country. Again, politicians fail to realize that their laws are limited by geography whereas the internet knows no borders.

      --
      Seven puppies were harmed during the making of this post.
    5. Re:Really? by bloodhawk · · Score: 2

      from panama, well you just did an international transaction and are therefore subject to money laundering laws around international transfers which require declaration of the parties involved in the transfer and the reason for the transfer..

    6. Re:Really? by Dunbal · · Score: 1

      Prove that the wallet is in Panama. This gets real complicated, real fast. I bought some bitcoins online, I didn't like it, and I sold them. Prove me wrong.

      --
      Seven puppies were harmed during the making of this post.
    7. Re:Really? by Entrope · · Score: 1

      Bought bitcoins? Sold them? In exchange for what? Drugs? Guns or bombs? Pirated movies? This isn't looking very good for Bob the Bitcoin Launderer.

      The police found out that wallet X is Bob's (because he exchanged bitcoins for something useful), and that Bob was illegally hiding ownership of that wallet. Bob is probably going to end up with the burden of proving that each transaction from wallet X was with a third party, rather than Bob trying to launder bitcoins to other wallets he controls -- after all, the government knows Bob was trying to hide his bitcoins. Otherwise the law might say he must forfeit a monetary equivalent to those bitcoins, even if he claims to not own them any longer. On top of that, Bob will need to pay a transaction fee whenever he shuffles bitcoins between wallets.

    8. Re:Really? by bloodhawk · · Score: 2

      It isn't up to them to prove, it is up to you to prove it was legitimate! money laundering laws were created to prevent the scenarios you describe by putting requirements on you and any exchanges and 3rd parties involved to correctly record the transactions and identities and report them where appropriate.

    9. Re: Really? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      If there investigation is about tax avoidance you are assumed guilty until you prove otherwise.

    10. Re:Really? by mysidia · · Score: 1

      So declare your wallets as required, but fund each transaction when you go to make a spend by generating a batch of unique Wallet IDs, and then spend the funds to the new Wallet IDs through one of the "Privacy mixing services"

      Conclude a sequence of transactions resulting in the new wallet IDs having zero remaining, then after you confirmed the Balance is 0, and the Bitcoin network has 1000 confirmations, destroy your record of the now empty temporary wallet IDs.....

      Next time you go to declare your wallets, those wallet IDs won't have any funds in them, and you disposed of the IDs, so they are not Wallets that you have anymore.

    11. Re:Really? by Opportunist · · Score: 3, Insightful

      Shhh... Governments are like parents. As a kid, you keep your parents thinking that you believe in Santa so they continue to give you gifts at Christmas. With governments, you keep them thinking that their laws work so they keep out of your hair.

      --
      We used to have a Bill of Rights. Now, with the rights gone, all we have left is the bill.
    12. Re: Really? by Entrope · · Score: 2

      Why do you think the law won't require you to declare each wallet when you first create, fund, or acquire it?

    13. Re:Really? by AmiMoJo · · Score: 5, Informative

      Nope.

      From the proposal:

      In respect of designing providers of exchange services between virtual currencies and fiat currencies as obliged entities, the proposed amendments respect the proportionality principle. In order to allow competent authorities to monitor suspicious transactions with virtual currencies, while preserving the innovative advances offered by such currencies, it is appropriate to define as obliged entities under the 4AMLD all gatekeepers that control access to virtual currencies, in particular exchange platforms and wallet providers.

      In other words, it will be perfectly legal to use Bitcoin as you please and they don't propose making people register their private wallets etc, just the same as they would never propose people register their physical wallets. They are only interested in having exchanges and wallet providers (virtual banks) collect this information, just like exchanges and banks for fiat currency have to.

      The idea is to make money laundering harder. It's a sensible, practical proposal that is merely the existing laws applying to fiat currencies being applied to virtual ones. It would be stupid if they didn't.

      I know it's unfashionable to read the article, but this is what gives the EU a bad name and leads to stupidity like Brexit. It look me about 30 seconds to see what this was really about. Doesn't help that TFA and the summary are both stupid I suppose.

      --
      const int one = 65536; (Silvermoon, Texture.cs)
      SJW, n: "Someone I don't like, and by the way I'm a fuckwit" - AC
    14. Re: Really? by Entrope · · Score: 1

      "Nope" to you. Including those entities as "obligated entities" has the effect I described. 4AMLD requires that obligated entities not keep anonymous accounts, and if any anonymous account exists (from before the time it came into effect, or covered the account in question), that they do Customer Due Diligence before the account can be used.

      Next time, do more than 30 seconds of research before spouting off your mouth. Governments make these regulations a nearly impenetrable maze on purpose.

    15. Re: Really? by zakhttp2476 · · Score: 1

      Haha that's a cool comparaison

    16. Re:Really? by Bengie · · Score: 1

      Even better. Combine "New wallet with each transaction" and "Report every wallet" and you have a recipe to DDOS the service.

    17. Re:Really? by bluefoxlucid · · Score: 2

      "Making money laundering harder" isn't really sensible. All implementations are hubris and rather inconvenient for model-citizens.

      In the United States, carrying a certain sum of cash is indication of criminal activity. This is done to combat money laundering and drug trade. They might not be able to charge you with a crime, but they can seize your cash; it's called asset forfeiture. In Alabama, if the police pull you over for a broken tail light, they can demand you display your wallet contents (notably by way of demanding to see your license), and seize any cash if you have more than $100. United States border control looks for "large sums", which might be $2,000 or $5,000, notably if you don't declare that you have a "large sum"; the official definition is $10,000, but smaller sums become large sums by way of fuzzy laws (i.e. if you pull $9,995 from a bank, the bank has to report that you seem to be skirting the mandatory reporting law for transactions over $10,000, even though you didn't actually pull a legally-defined "large sum", because you seem to have specifically avoided pulling a large sum).

    18. Re: Really? by mysidia · · Score: 1

      Why do you think the law won't require you to declare each wallet when you first create, fund, or acquire it?

      Because governments are generally inefficient and require information reported to them through paper forms on a quarterly or annual basis.

      Also, you don't ever necessarily actually create, fund, or acquire the Temporary wallet ID that generates the final spend.

      Essentially.... you are concerned about the whole public knowing all your transactions, since Bitcoin transactions are public knowledge, and your Wallet IDs become a public record..... you spend BTC to a person or service provider located in another country who is not subject to the registration requirement.

      Your service provider combines customer funds, then routes the final spend through a mixing service to protect your privacy from general scrutiny by the public, and since your SP is outside the area required to register, the SP itself does not have to register its wallets, And they only retain traceable info about the final destination Wallet ID spent to, not the source.

    19. Re:Really? by rickb928 · · Score: 1

      It seems the key field is real-world ID.

      You're going to create a new one of those for each transaction also, right? And if they can discern the real-world ID once, they can do it again, so IP address, any of various 'fingerprints', etc will need to be randomized or incremented.

      Iterate, and you're safe, until you find our you're not.

      --
      deleting the extra space after periods so i can stay relevant, yeah.
    20. Re:Really? by Flammon · · Score: 1

      Vendors will be forced to only accept payments from a whitelist of BTC addresses and you'll need to identify yourself to be on that list.

    21. Re: Really? by Entrope · · Score: 1

      So you're going to evade the anti-money-laundering laws by having a third party in some other country launder money for you.

      Do you know how *else* I know you didn't read the relevant parts of these EU Directives?

  2. I guess that's one way by vomitology · · Score: 1

    ...to find out who satoshi nakamoto is.

    --
    ~Knowledge is knowing that a tomato is a fruit, but Wisdom is knowing not to put it in a fruit salad.
    1. Re:I guess that's one way by William+Robinson · · Score: 1

      if, and only if, he/she prefers using those bitcoins, over anonymity.

  3. Well, to be realistic by the_almighty_gooby · · Score: 1

    Good luck accomplishing that!

    1. Re:Well, to be realistic by bloodhawk · · Score: 1

      Why? seems a relatively easy thing to do, sure there will be some they can't get data for but they have access to bitcoin exchange data, any conversion to real money or purchase of goods etc leaves an easy to follow record of activity. Sure you could have many wallets and never convert anything or buy anything real but then they probably aren't the main target of this, seems aimed at money laundering which will definitely be something they can follow the bouncing ball for.

    2. Re:Well, to be realistic by AHuxley · · Score: 1

      They create a list of the last people who sold a set of numbers for a small fee to "someone" a year ago for cash?
      Every EU transaction at some level is now with a registered informant?
      Don't risk a spend or buy transaction in the EU? A digital currency seems more vital than ever :)

      --
      Domestic spying is now "Benign Information Gathering"
    3. Re:Well, to be realistic by hawguy · · Score: 1

      Well, Canada and the USA aren't part of that, that's for sure. Every restaurant, Walmart, mini mart, gas station, hell, even furniture stores will take the opposite countries currency happily. Typically at a loss for the buyer. I've ended up doing this a few times when I've been short on cash and not a single time have they asked for any information at all, ever. In fact, all the currency conversions I've done at professional institutions, such as large currency conversion chains... never once been asked for info.

      Perhaps in border towns, but in most parts of the USA, stores will only accept American currency and will look at you suspiciously if you try to use foreign currency - even Canadian.

      I used my Canadian credit card there successfully more than once, effectively making the retailer accept Canadian dollars.

      That's not how foreign credit card transactions typically work - the merchant gets paid in his local currency, and your bank exchanges that currency for your local currency (usually charging you a foreign transaction fee or a more expensive exchange rate).

      I've seen some merchants in heavy tourist areas let the customer decide which of a few currencies the transaction is charged in when you make the transaction, but that's not the norm.

    4. Re:Well, to be realistic by NotQuiteReal · · Score: 1

      It takes me about 10-15 minutes of watching a bored teller at Wells Fargo tapping a keyboard before I can get out of there to buy or sell CAD, Euros, Pounds, or Yen... (and I highly recommend having at least your first cab/train fare in local currency when you travel. I have skipped a very long line of cashless tourists at CDG airport to buy my train ticket to Paris from a machine with cash. To be fair that was 3 years ago, maybe the chip cards are good-to-go now, if you remember to get your PIN.)

      Every time, I am amazed... really, 10 minutes to change a few hundred USD to something else?

      --
      This issue is a bit more complicated than you think.
    5. Re:Well, to be realistic by NotQuiteReal · · Score: 1

      Pro Tip - ALWAYS charge in the local currency. Your credit card exchange rate is almost guaranteed to be better than the merchant's exchange rate. (Typical cards charge 3%, some only 1% and there are a few that charge 0%).

      The merchant exchange rate will approach the worst rates + fees that you will find in Airport kiosks.

      --
      This issue is a bit more complicated than you think.
    6. Re:Well, to be realistic by dbIII · · Score: 1

      Blockchain

    7. Re:Well, to be realistic by Mystic+Pixel · · Score: 1

      have fun with all that cash next time you're at AMS and have to buy a train ticket.

      you CAN'T buy one in cash there anymore. You have to stand in a line with all the other confused people trying to buy a ticket in local currency, only to look for a currency slot and not find one. Complete nonsense if you ask me.

    8. Re:Well, to be realistic by tsqr · · Score: 1

      Only a fool thinks they aren't already being tracked as for all intensive purposes bitcoin is NOT anonymous.

      So, it's anonymous for non-intensive purposes? It's a doggy-dog world out there.

  4. LOL Politicians by Dunbal · · Score: 1

    And they're going to enforce the "opt in" part of this deal how, again? The whole POINT of virtual currencies is to keep them out of control of the government(s).

    --
    Seven puppies were harmed during the making of this post.
    1. Re:LOL Politicians by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Insightful

      And they're going to enforce the "opt in" part of this deal how,

        "Jail" the way governments control things.

    2. Re:LOL Politicians by Dunbal · · Score: 1

      Yeah ok. But you have to catch the guy first.

      --
      Seven puppies were harmed during the making of this post.
  5. Re:One unsaid goal is to ease confiscation by Dunbal · · Score: 2

    You bet. Because every year we have more and more restrictive bank regulations (to the point where it's now difficult to move your own damned money around from account to account or asset to asset), yet there are more drugs, more laundering and there is more terrorism. Makes you think those laws were never intended to go after criminals in the first place.

    --
    Seven puppies were harmed during the making of this post.
  6. Coin mixing by vossman77 · · Score: 1

    It is going to be hard to connect buyers and sellers with all the coin mixing services available. Especially with popular alt coins like dash coin (http://dash.org ) that have mixing built into the protocol.

  7. Re:One unsaid goal is to ease confiscation by bloodhawk · · Score: 2

    The entire value of bitcoin is only a few billion dollars, this wouldn't even put a dent in a weeks interests payments of many countries.

  8. Re:Bet they want to do that with the euro by mSparks43 · · Score: 1

    They already do.
    What the OP misses is this targets the exchanges.

    But desperation would be a better description.

  9. no evidence by ooloorie · · Score: 2

    There is no evidence that Bitcoin was used by terrorists. This is the usual statist bullshit coming from European governments.

    1. Re:no evidence by worldtech-a3x · · Score: 1

      On the rubble of Building 7.

  10. Re:Great. by vomitology · · Score: 1

    That'd be awesome! Run a few raids, pay for my driver's license renewal!

    --
    ~Knowledge is knowing that a tomato is a fruit, but Wisdom is knowing not to put it in a fruit salad.
  11. Has anyone linked Paris attacks to bitcoins? by misnohmer · · Score: 1

    Last I checked there were no conclusive links Paris attacks were funded by bitcoins (one source here http://www.coindesk.com/bitcoi... ). I'm pretty sure it was proven though that the terrorist were breathing French oxygen in the atmosphere though, so maybe we should get the French to start tightly regulating who can breathe over there and who can plant plants that generate that oxygen (you know, since it may be used by a terrorist)?

    1. Re:Has anyone linked Paris attacks to bitcoins? by campuscodi · · Score: 1

      EU used unconfirmed rumors in the beginning. It was cleared later that ISIS terrorists didn't use Bitcoin, but by that point the ball got rolling and nobody else cared.

  12. Re: One unsaid goal is to ease confiscation by prefec2 · · Score: 2

    How can you run out of money as a state? Usually you 'print' new money. That is BTW the modus operandi of the FED and the ECB today.

  13. Re:Great. by Areyoukiddingme · · Score: 1

    That'd be awesome! Run a few raids, pay for my driver's license renewal!

    I never said the exchange rate was favorable...

  14. Did you miss FIFA? by dbIII · · Score: 1

    Geography is seen as a mere inconvenience when applying laws. Hosting it in Panama is a very insignificant speed bump compared with Switzerland, especially that since to the USA Panama is very much what the Romans called a "client state".

  15. Penny wise and pound foolish again by 0dugo0 · · Score: 2

    €168 billion in VAT fraud a year because they can't exchange tax data if their life depended on it, and now they want to run a shadow bank to track my digital collectors items?

    1. Re:Penny wise and pound foolish again by bluefoxlucid · · Score: 1

      Sales and use taxes, such as VAT, are one of the most-effective ways to eliminate jobs. Any state that has a sales tax or a VAT is already loony.

  16. Tracking money by Wowsers · · Score: 1

    I hope there's a list of serial numbers for cash, so we know how many brown envelopes the crooked politicians have accepted in bribes to pass EU laws.

    --
    Take Nobody's Word For It.
  17. Re:One unsaid goal is to ease confiscation by houghi · · Score: 1

    It is higly regulated, because they can. Transfering money takes 2 working days when you transfer from or to a business account, because 9/11. Just before that date, they already had the direct payment between people in place. The US cried wolf and obviously the banks are not complaining.

    Getting a credit gets harder. Not because people earl less, but because there are more rules. And why? Because it is possible. No other reason. Well, the reason is mostly money laundering and yes there will obviously be more money maundering, because they catch more people, because they get better at it.

    More drugs? Not in Europe.

    That said, it is extremely easy to move money from one account to another. I do it all the time. Just when it is more than 10.000EUR you will have to do it twice or take some extra time, because that is the tresh hold for the bank to start a separate investigation. They do not like to do that, so they just do not allow it by standard, but will when you ask them.

    The restrictiveness in the banking workd I seer (in Belgium) is mostly to protect the individual from taking so much credit he can't pay anymore, so to protect them from themselves or an extention from what already existed. e.g. the definition of what is illegal. e.g. legal money for illegal activities is now illegal. That did not used to be the case.

    --
    Don't fight for your country, if your country does not fight for you.
  18. old germanic salute by umghhh · · Score: 1

    I think the only thing that EU is still missing is proper uniforms for its guardians (black with nice double lightning would be perfect on the collar). I find the said salute a bit silly but if they want to go all he way then so be it. Schulz and Juncker are also much less photogenic than the little Austrian back in the day was however and this is not fixable I think.

  19. This is the EU by rickb928 · · Score: 1

    Freedom is a threat to 'them'.

    Liberty is optional, regulated, and therefor nonexistent.

    If you are not in the EU, take this as a lesson and consider how your situation could become that of someone in the EU. Then act accordingly.

    --
    deleting the extra space after periods so i can stay relevant, yeah.
  20. Cash out by NewYork · · Score: 1

    Govt can always track them when they cash out their bitcoins