While many people here have discussed the danger of losing funds if a so-called “no-KYC” service secretly routes through centralized exchanges (which then freeze coins and demand KYC), there’s another equally serious risk that hasn’t been addressed in this thread.

In the ANN, the operator explicitly states:

This means the service openly accepts coins regardless of whether they are already flagged by blockchain analysis systems as stolen, hacked, or linked to illicit activity.
But think about the implications:
- If the service accepts “dirty” coins, those same coins don’t magically get cleaned.
- The next customer could be handed those very tainted outputs in their swap.
- You may unknowingly end up holding funds that are already blacklisted by your future counterparties.

So even if your swap goes smoothly and you receive your funds, you could later discover that the assets are unspendable in practice because no merchant will accept them.

In short: using a service that advertises “any AML score accepted” doesn’t risk your privacy, but it risks leaving you with toxic coins.

It’s surprising this hasn’t been pointed out yet in the discussion, but it’s a fundamental reason why serious users should be extremely cautious.

While many people here have discussed the danger of losing funds if a so-called “no-KYC” service secretly routes through centralized exchanges (which then freeze coins and demand KYC), there’s another equally serious risk that hasn’t been addressed in this thread.

In the ANN, the operator explicitly states:

This means the service openly accepts coins regardless of whether they are already flagged by blockchain analysis systems as stolen, hacked, or linked to illicit activity.
But think about the implications:
- If the service accepts “dirty” coins, those same coins don’t magically get cleaned.
- The next customer could be handed those very tainted outputs in their swap.
- You may unknowingly end up holding funds that are already blacklisted by your future counterparties.

So even if your swap goes smoothly and you receive your funds, you could later discover that the assets are unspendable in practice because no merchant will accept them.

In short: using a service that advertises “any AML score accepted” doesn’t risk your privacy, but it risks leaving you with toxic coins.

It’s surprising this hasn’t been pointed out yet in the discussion, but it’s a fundamental reason why serious users should be extremely cautious.

While many people here have discussed the danger of losing funds if a so-called “no-KYC” service secretly routes through centralized exchanges (which then freeze coins and demand KYC), there’s another equally serious risk that hasn’t been addressed in this thread.

In the ANN, the operator explicitly states:

This means the service openly accepts coins regardless of whether they are already flagged by blockchain analysis systems as stolen, hacked, or linked to illicit activity.
But think about the implications:
- If the service accepts “dirty” coins, those same coins don’t magically get cleaned.
- The next customer could be handed those very tainted outputs in their swap.
- You may unknowingly end up holding funds that are already blacklisted by your future counterparties.

So even if your swap goes smoothly and you receive your funds, you could later discover that the assets are unspendable in practice because no merchant will accept them.

In short: using a service that advertises “any AML score accepted” doesn’t risk your privacy, but it risks leaving you with toxic coins.

It’s surprising this hasn’t been pointed out yet in the discussion, but it’s a fundamental reason why serious users should be extremely cautious.