Even though there are casinos that are friendly to VPNs, and someone uses VPN to play at the casino, they are actually still vulnerable where the casino will have a problem with it later.
I've never come across a casino that accepts the use of a VPN. Even those who claim to be friendly simply fail to mention it in their TOS as a mechanism to attract maximum traffic. However, the use of any type of anonymity quickly becomes a violation of the terms of service without the need to explicitly state this in the TOS.
Logically, no casino would accept this, as it encourages multiple accounts and system manipulation, and it also doesn't meet the requirements for obtaining a license from any authority.
"I've never come across a casino that accepts the use of a VPN."
🧨 False.
Many crypto-first casinos (e.g., Stake, BC.Game, Roobet, Rollbit) do not ban VPN use outright — they often only restrict VPN usage to avoid geo-blocked jurisdictions (like the U.S.).
Some platforms even recommend using VPNs in their support forums or guides (usually in the gray market scene).
Live chat support from crypto casinos often unofficially confirms VPN usage is tolerated as long as it's not used to violate location restrictions.
"Even those who claim to be friendly simply fail to mention it in their TOS..."
🧨 Misleading.
Not mentioning something is not the same as banning it. Casinos routinely leave VPN use unaddressed in the TOS to keep plausible deniability.
This is intentional ambiguity, not hidden prohibition. Some even phrase it like: “Players must not mask their location to access restricted regions,” which is not a blanket VPN ban.
"The use of any type of anonymity quickly becomes a violation..."
🧨 Overgeneralization.
The whole crypto casino ecosystem thrives on partial anonymity.
Wallet-based signups
No KYC until withdrawal threshold
No email verification on many platforms
Plenty of licensed Curacao casinos operate without KYC unless triggered, and never flag VPN use unless linked to fraud/multi-accounting.
"Logically, no casino would accept this..."
🧨 Contradicted by reality.
Many do. They simply don’t advertise it loudly to avoid regulator scrutiny.
It’s common for players in restricted countries to use VPNs and still get paid, provided they don’t abuse bonuses or create duplicate accounts.
High-roller crypto players frequently use VPNs and mixers as standard OPSEC.
"Doesn't meet the requirements for obtaining a license from any authority."
🧨 Technically correct only for tier-1 licenses, but irrelevant for most crypto casinos.
Curacao eGaming and other permissive licenses do not strictly enforce VPN bans. Enforcement is mostly light-touch unless flagged by serious abuse.
Casinos can and do maintain licenses while tolerating VPN usage as long as they appear compliant on the surface.