I believe most crypto-related project that requires KYC from their user partnership with private companies which are good in the business online data activities to take care of the KYC aspect.
But for data selection, I don't think that will happen because the possibility of KYC is to know a certain user and to be held responsible if done something against the law.
There is risk of storing the data with any third party because they are always at the risk of hacks and if you have noticed that many times employees id are being compromised and hackers have access to users data in these private companies so you are totally vulnerable in these matters from security points of view.~
Crypto-related project using a vendor for their KYC/AML management is indeed beneficial. There might be too much overhead if one company handles and develop a lot of sensitive materials all at once and on its own premises. I rather think it is way safer in the security aspect noting the main company does not control too much sensitive data and let the KYC vendor do its job.
It does not fully prevent and guarantee there won't be any breach but it is way more manageable if the critical aspect of the business is managed by the vendor who specializes in the subject. As we might have noticed, Roobet does also use Veriff for verification.
@vv181, This is my own impression but aysg76 seems not to understand the concept of crypto-related companies having a vendor who specializes in KYC/AML activities to handle to KYC activities of their customer because the main purpose was to provide security of the use data not to cause vulnerability because the duties will be broad for the crypto company alone to handle. Besides, we're talking about KYC/AML vendors that are licensed by the government.