Add "Cash by mail" as a payment option

[mutagenfork]

Bisq advertises privacy as one of the features it offers; to whit:

"Private – no one except trading partners exchange personally identifying data. All personal data is stored locally."

However, this is not true. All of the currently listed payment methods require signing up with a bank or financial institution and sharing with them rather invasive details about one's identity and financial history.

The currently allowed payment methods are also unavailable to anyone who is unbanked, such as an immigrant, or a resident of a country where the banking system is underdeveloped and only available to the wealthy.

Therefore, I'd like to request that bisq add support for payments by "cash in person" and "cash by mail".

Note that this is already an option at several other exchanges/companies:

https://paxful.com/buy-bitcoin/cash-by-mail
https://localbitcoins.com/buy-bitcoins-online/cash-by-mail/
https://moneroforcash.com/

[mutagenfork]

Here's how "cash by mail" payments for bitcoin (BTC) are handled on other sites:

• Bitcoin buyer packages cash in a tamper-resistant cash control bag

• Buyer films packaging with the tracking number already affixed to packaging.

• Buy sends the package with USPS tracking.

• Seller films the opening of the package, making sure that the tracking number provided by the sender is visible in the video.

• Seller counts the cash, and authenticates the cash.

• If the unpackaging video shows there is nothing in the package, the cash is short, or the cash is counterfeit then then the seller can lodge a dispute.

• If the cash is short, then the arbitrator can ask the buyer to send more cash to the seller, or refund some of the BTC.

• If there is extra cash, the the arbitrator can ask the seller to send the buyer extra BTC as a separate transaction.

• If the dispute goes to adjudication:

• For the buyer to win, they'd do so on the basis that the unpackaging video showed some evidence of either tampering with the tracking sticker or the package. Or the seller didn't do a proper job of filming the unpackaging.

• For seller to win, they would need to somehow prove that they did not receive the package or it did not contain the contents promised. This is a tall order. Adjudication would be able to see that the tracking number provided showed that the package was delivered (and possibly signed for). The packaging video would also clearly show that the right amount of cash going into the package. In order to succeed with a scam, the seller would need to tamper with the tracking sticker and transfer it to another package and video that as the fake video they would submit to adjudicators--in practice, it's quite a bit of work to make the packaging look similar enough to fool the arbitrators.

• On LocalBitcoins the adjudication standard is that if the cash doesn't make it to the Bitcoin seller for any reason, the default resolution (with rare exceptions) is that the escrow will be resolved in the favor of the seller.

[dan-da]

+1

nice writeup of cash by mail procedures. Maybe you can do one for cash in person also? perhaps should be a separate issue.

[cbeams]

We'll do a short call about 'cash via mail' ideas later today. Anyone is free to join, and @mutagenfork it would be great to have you there!

https://www.google.com/calendar/event?eid=N2RhM3BiZ3BnYTJ1OTk5MDBoNHZkOGQxcDggYWRmaXVpb2txOWp0YWM4dDlrZW9tYzAwYjBAZw

[ManfredKarrer]

I am not sure sure if I can make it (release), but will try.

[cbeams]

Updated zoom call link: https://zoom.us/j/301252266

[cbeams]

@mutagenfork, we're here now: https://zoom.us/j/301252266

[dscotese]

I'm glad this issue is still open. I left a comment in #1110 about arbitration. I think that arbitration is wonderful even if it fails sometimes. The trick is to positively identify an arbiter (sign stuff with the private key of an address from which you send some sort of bond or something?) so that their reputation can follow them. I also would like to see a cash by mail option in BISQ.

[ripcurlx]

@alfsbs Do you think this payment method is something we should consider?

[aejontargaryen]

bitcoin does have great benefit to the unbanked; and vice versa
i bought my first bitcoin through paxful.
i know that gift cards starts going a bit 'out there' but could it work to start using only certain prepaid debit cards? not charging the card but, exchanging its ownership code..?
The back and forth style exchange process of verifying card number etc is very similar to the bisq trade protocol.
did not mean to butt-in . just saw similarities.

[dscotese]

Demand for cash by mail might go up quite a bit because localbitcoins just announced that they will be disabling all cash by mail ads on Dec. 27th. There is an effort to stop them.

[stale]

This issue has been automatically marked as stale because it has not had recent activity. It will be closed if no further activity occurs. Thank you for your contributions.

[stale]

This issue has been automatically closed because of inactivity. Feel free to reopen it if you think it is still relevant.

[dmp1ce]

Another exchange, Paxful, is adding KYC steps in order to trade local and by mail cash trades. Even if Bisq only allowed cash trades as a way to exchange contact information securely, I think it would be a valuable feature.

Currently, the way local cash trades is implemented, I only use Bisq to share contact information securely because it is too much of a hassle to complete local trades which require a laptop.

I think this feature should be revisited as more and more centralized exchanges are regulated.

[dan-da]

+1 for in-person trades to be contact info only. Or at least have it as an option. Basically it would work as present, but without the multi-sig escrow. Then people might actually use it....

[dave2014btc]

Hello, i am trader on localbitcoins and paxful. done just over 1000 cash by mail trade, had about 5 disputed in the whole time. thats about 0.5% of trades. i think this method of payment needs to be added. the only reason i do not use bisq is i only trade with cash in person or mail and they is not enough incentive to use bisq yet with my methods. once it accepts cash by mail i would more than likely direct customers from other websites as i like the idea of a decentralised exchange. im just surprised its not already implemented as less risk than in person.

[crocket]

@dave2014btc Can you teach us how to do mail-by-cash tranasactions anonymously? I'm trying to use mail-by-cash deals on localmonero. But, I have never done cash deals with other people.

I imagine that I could do so pseudonomously if I bought and installed password-protected delivery storage in my apartment where many people live. When I buy cash with XMR, I would just have cash delivered to the storage box which is shared with my neighbors.

If I have cash delivered to my home address, my opponent learns my home address. I imagine that in the near future, governments may set up cash-by-mail traps on localmonero to punish random suckers who want to buy XMR without leaving traces in the system.

[dave2014btc]

I do not try to do it anonymously , but I use po box to protect myself from bad actors. If someone really wanted they could buy xmr from you and send package with a tracker hidden inside the cardboard on the box and follow it exactly to you. But your idea sounds decent but wouldn't be surprised if someone ripped it off the wall knowing they was cash in it. Best way to use po box costs a bit but saves you from most bad actors. Btw I'm always buying BTC and crypto for cash in mail.

…

On Wed, 30 Sep 2020, 11:01 crocket, ***@***.***> wrote: @dave2014btc <https://github.com/dave2014btc> Can you teach us how to do mail-by-cash tranasactions anonymously? I'm trying to use mail-by-cash deals on localmonero. But, I have never done cash deals with other people. I imagine that I could do so pseudonomously if I bought and installed password-protected delivery storage in my apartment where many people live. When I buy cash with XMR, I would just have cash delivered to the storage box which is shared with my neighbors. If I have cash delivered to my home address, my opponent learns my home address. I imagine that governments may set up cash-by-mail traps on localmonero to punish random suckers who want to buy XMR without leaving traces in the system. — You are receiving this because you were mentioned. Reply to this email directly, view it on GitHub <#1101 (comment)>, or unsubscribe <https://github.com/notifications/unsubscribe-auth/AN3D2GRIY4SLVLPO5UDTKWDSIL6YHANCNFSM4EIZPVHA> .

[crocket]

@dave2014btc A tracker is unlikely to be used but is still physically possible. How is post office box any different except that it's more difficult to rip off such a box and there are CCTVs around it?

Why do you always buy cryptocurrencies by cash in mail unless you are trying to buy cryptocurrencies privately?

Do you have any better idea for private transactions?

[dave2014btc]

The po box at the post office is not anonymous , also it's not a physically secure box just a box in a room behind the counter. They are cameras if someone was to take something but I always ask people to send special delivery as you can insure cash in the u.k. but it means I don't have to give my address to random people and it also means that I can collect my mail at 8am even tho it won't be delivered till 1pm also untracked mail seems to arrive a day faster. They are pros and cons. Even police or official people will need a warrant of some sort to get my information from the post office. I have other ideas on how you could do it but just adds more risk on money being lost.

…

On Wed, 30 Sep 2020, 12:23 crocket, ***@***.***> wrote: @dave2014btc <https://github.com/dave2014btc> A tracker is unlikely to be used but is still physically possible. How is post office box any different except that it's more difficult to rip off such a box and there are CCTVs around it? Do you have any better idea? — You are receiving this because you were mentioned. Reply to this email directly, view it on GitHub <#1101 (comment)>, or unsubscribe <https://github.com/notifications/unsubscribe-auth/AN3D2GUS6FXHHAPZ3SV7NE3SIMIMNANCNFSM4EIZPVHA> .

[crocket]

@dave2014btc I want to hear your ideas. Perhaps, we can develop this idea somewhere else.

I specifically don't want governments and corporations to be able to trace my transactions. I also don't want whom I make deals with to know my address. I want privacy.

By the way, you can detect trackers by using various EMF meters. If it emits wireless signal, EMF meters can detect electromagnetic frequencies. Trackers have to emit strong wireless signals if they want to communicate with nearby cell towers.

[ripcurlx]

Reopening as there is still an ongoing discussion.

[pazza83]

Please see below a summary of the proposal to add Cash by Mail as a payment option to Bisq.

Cash by Mail has many desirable features for use as a payment method.

Some of the contentious issues are around protentional concerns with what evidence can be provided for delivery / receipt of the cash, and if the cash is or is not genuine.

There are also concerns around if potential mediation / arbitration of Cash by Mail trades can be facilitated by the current mediation and arbitration systems in place.

I am in favor of adding Cash by Mail as a payment option and keeping it under close review for the next 12 months. At 12 months the benefits/negatives will be more obvious and a decision can be made to continue or retire this payment option.

For the purpose of the DAO vote I propose using the below parameters. These can be further agreed if needed.

Please see the vote as being to vote in agreement or disagreement with the principle that "Cash by mail" should be added as a payment option to Bisq.

Trade sizes: Default as per bisq-network/proposals#264
Signing required: No
Deposit amount: 15-50%
Maker / Taker fees preferred: 1% maker, 1% taker (to compensate for mediation complexities)
Maker / Taker fees minimum: Default
Trade protocol: Clearly defined both in terms of Bisq's minimum expectations, and also by the seller to add any personal / localization information (this will be visible before trade accepted on Bisq in the same way as F2F traders can provide additional information). For reference see #1101 (comment)
Risk of sending cash: The buyer is responsible for ensuring the seller takes delivery of the cash. They can choose an appropriate courier and insurance to protect themselves from any problems that occur during delivery.
Warnings: Clearly defined at all user interaction points; wiki, within client etc
Review: all the above parameters to be reviewed after 12 months of inclusion. Review to include the possibility of payment method to be withdrawn.

Please see below a summary of the features of Cash by Mail:

Essential	Desirable	Definite No’s
Very low risk of chargeback	No risk of chargeback	< very low risk of chargeback
Way to verify the sender in the received payment	Ability to enter Trade ID as reference	No way to verify the sender in the received payment
Trade time less than one week	Instant payment	Trade time more than one week
Singular Fiat currency per account, traders may wish to create multiple accounts	Multi-currency	Not a payment method for fiat currency
Significant user base	Large user base	No significant user base
High usability	High usability and great user experience	< high amount usability
No KYC required	Allows users to trade with upmost privacy. Minimal identifying information as possible (no names, email, phone etc required)	Some KYC required (proof of address, ID, selfie)
Low risk of scam attempts	Trades are as safe and secure for as many users as possible	???< low risk of scam attempts
???Traders can provide evidence of payment / receipt	Verification of payment can be made using PageSigner or similar	???Traders will be unable to provide evidence of payment / receipt
Minimum limit at least equal to at least account limits protocols	No minimum limits	Minimum limit not able to achieve account limits protocols
Maximum limits equal to at least 0.01 BTC	Large payment limits up to 2 BTC	Maximum limit is less than 0.01 BTC
Likely to increase liquidity	Likely to open markets for different countries and currencies	Likely to decrease liquidity
???Low risk of mediation	Very low risk of mediation	???< low risk of mediation
Low risk for traders from government agencies	No risk for traders from government agencies	< low risk for traders from government agencies
Fees are not be a barrier to trading	No fees for transactions	Fees are a barrier to trading
Only minor changes needed to trade protocol	No changes needed to trade protocol	> Minor changes needed to trade protocol

[MwithM]

Maker and taker fees should not be higher than other payment methods. Dispute costs should not be subsidized by all the users but paid by those who use mediation and arbitration.

I think this payment method could be multicurrency, as most postal cards can cross borders.

[chimp1984]

Deposit amount: 30-100%

Just want to mention that this is a bit extra dev effort and we usually dont have payment method specific deposits.
I think if MAD is a main protection feature we though have to do that.

Maker / Taker fees: 1% maker, 1% taker (to compensate for mediation complexities)

Same here. Will be extra dev effort and might conflict or complicate possible future changes as bisq-network/proposals#280.
I think the extra dev effort does not justify the potential extra revenue (will depend how much it will be used). We could do it later as well if we think its justified.

[chimp1984]

I think this payment method could be multicurrency, as most postal cards can cross borders.

Not sure of the insured methods work cross border, I doubt.

[MwithM]

I think this payment method could be multicurrency, as most postal cards can cross borders.

Not sure of the insured methods work cross border, I doubt.

Is to be insured a requirement?
If it's kind of common to send packages with different currencies crossing borders, changing this will be easy? If it isn't, i think it's best to let traders decide if they wish to use it. I was going to oppose to not having a smaller max trading amount, but I followed the same reasoning: traders should know the risks they take and act accordingly.

[pazza83]

Yes :) Think there will be discussion around the protocols, and that can take into account dev time. I will update it to be same as normal.

Yes I agree in some instances it can be multicurrency.

[MwithM]

@jmacxx If mediation and arbitrator teams want to go ahead, there's not much more to say through a DAO vote.
I know I won't use this payment method with arbitration but I won't vote against that DAO proposal. If there's traders willing to use it this way they just need mediators to work on it.

[pazza83]

I don't think any current mediators have opposed it.

[chimp1984]

@dave2014btc
Thanks for your inputs!
As others mentioned already Bisq does not has a centralized reputation system as that would not work with protection of privacy. As the main security tool on other platfroms is that reputation and as you stated thats a main motivation to not scam as you want to be in the game for longer time we need other protection.
Do you think that a high security deposit (15% is min. anyway for all methods) will be accepted by your trade peers? Discussed amounts are 50-100% deposit for both sides which gets refunded once trade is completed. The deposit is in the 2of2 multisig, no trusted third party. So full control by the 2 traders. But that opens also a new risk of blackmail. There is always one trader who has more to lose at a certain point in the protocol. The one who has less to lose could then blackmail the other. For smaller amounts and for high deposits that risk become lower but it cannot be eliminated.

Regarding privacy/physical security:
Are most users using their home address? If so a market maker would collect a lot of sensible and security relevant data. E.g. if you have collected 100s or 1000s of addresses of BTC holders and you get hacked your computer the hacker know where BTC holders life. Just imagine BTC goes to 100k - that will be a very real risk exposure to those traders to get robbed at their home.
Are people on other platforms not concerned about that? Or do they use mailboxes instead of home addresses?
Another risk is that regulators (market makers acting as high volume pro traders might easily become a target of regulatory requirements) capture such a market maker and confiscate that data and know immediately a large chunk of the BTC holders. Atm of course its not illegal to hold/trade BTC but times can change and some ugly tendencies are on the way to become law in the EU (enforcement to register all your btc addresses). Or just unclear tax situation where the citizen is guilty by default and need to proof that he is innocent (as it is the default tax authority attitute in Spain or Italy). That could be used very easily for criminalisation of BTC holders at any time and having honeypots where they get a large chunk of user data is a serious risk.

Regarding video/proof:
My main concern is not fake video which is indeed hard to do. But the process of puting in the money until handing over to the delivery company would need to be filmed without any cut and that is not feasible. Same for receiver, to get a real proof it would require a video showing the point of receipt from delivery company until unpacking and counting.
And then there is the case with fake money. If high quality fake it is likely hard to detect for non professionals with more advanced equipment. And its basically impossible to proof on video. So buyer could always claim he got problems later when using the cash at a bank and there is no possible proof for that.
All that ends up that the mediators cannot make a judegement in real disputes as they lack of a solid proof. They still can help with smaller problems not related to scam attempts, but the security of all other payment methods in Bisq (excl. F2F) is based on the fact that there are ways to get a solid proof so scammers will not even try is as they know they would lose.

[chimp1984]

@wiz @huey735 @Bisq-knight @leo816 Could you add your view?

[chimp1984]

traders should know the risks

Please consider that scams will not only hurt the trader but also have impact on Bisq:

• Reputation damage if lots of scams happen
• Higher effort for mediators/arbitrators/DAO stakeholders if it goes for reimbursement requests
• Effort for all contributors to deal with that (e.g. looking for improvements - this discussion already genereates a lot of effort)
• If Bisq is used as exit platform for scammers it attracts LE and can create further problems for Bisq.

[chimp1984]

DAO vote

I would prefer to use a DAO vote only as a last resort if there are 2 camps cleary pro and contra. But I don't see that.
I am for example in favor to add it but in a cautious way and not with naive assumptions which can easily lead to attract scammers or cause quickly further adoption or removal.

My suggestion (most are in sync with @pazza83's summary):

• Use high sec deposit (50-100%)
• Maker very clear that mediation can not guarantee to be able to help in case of fraud as there is no way for getting a solid proof. Best effort still can be done but traders have to know in advance higher risk of forever locked up funds or that the funds are donated to Bisq without reimbursement (in case one trader publishes the delayed payout tx).
• I would suggest that mediator decision is final. If the mediator is unable to come to a clear conclusion the refund agent and the DAO will not do a reimbursement. Otherwise they follow mediators payout suggestion.
• Suggest users to use insured delivery
• Use free text form as in F2F for details and TOC of maker
• Trade limits 0.25 BTC, no account signing

[pazza83]

I would prefer to use a DAO vote only as a last resort

Can you let me know thoughts behind why only as a last resort?

Can a vote not be used so speed up a process to gain agreement for or against a proposal quickly?

[ghost]

@pazza83 [...] as a mediator I would have no way to know if a scammer didn't simply send an empty envelope to the seller. #1101 (comment) by @wiz

[pazza83]

I do not think @wiz is currently a mediator

[chimp1984]

I do not think @wiz is currently a mediator

He revoked but then later become again afaik. Not 100% sure though.

[chimp1984]

Can you let me know thoughts behind why only as a last resort?

I think voting got such a good reputation as our modern democracy has forgotten about the original idea where democracy was about public discourse and finding consensus. Only in the event that no consensus can be found but all arguments have been laid out and are understood by the partizipants voting was the last resort to come to a result. Voting is dictatorship of the majority over the minority and creates a winner and a loser group, so it has potentially negative impact to a group (cause devision). In contrast to find a consensus makes the group stronger as they feel more aligned with the result they could create together. Also the result is then supported by the whole group and not only by the winner group (losers tend to form opposition). I don't want to over-interpret that for our small example here, but those are the reasons why I prefer to avoid DAO voting if not needed.

It also reduces outcomes to binary outcomes which might not always reflect good the situation. And it adds delay with the DAO cycle...

Can a vote not be used so speed up a process to gain agreement for or against a proposal quickly?

Sure if things get stuck it is for sure a tool to be used. I just don't have the feeling that this proposal suffers on stale mate problems, but rather of different expertise and understanding of risks (CBM experts vs. Bisq experts -> both tend to lack understanding of the other domain).
I know that issue is very old, but I think there have never been a serious discussion in the past, so it really started to me only recently...

[pazza83]

Thanks for letting me know that sounds great.

Does anyone have any objections to @chimp1984's proposal to proceed in a cautious way that reduces the risk of attracting scammers as per #1101 (comment)

It would also be great to hear from @jmacxx and @wiz to hear your feedback on @chimp1984's proposal with reference to your expressed concerns.

It would also be great to hear from @huey735, @huey735, @Bisq-knight, and @leo816 opinions on the concern raised @wiz about mediators and arbitrators not wanting to be in the situation where they need to make a judgement call based with reference to @dmp1ce #1101 (comment)

🥇 Fun Fact: This issue is the most commented ever on https://github.com/bisq-network/bisq/issues

[chimp1984]

The many comments are promising that this payment method might gain traction!

[crocket]

I prefer lazy consensus after getting work done to concensus before starting work. Faster iterations enabled by lazy consensus make an organization a fast learner. Learning from direct experiences is always better than paralysis by thought experiment committee.

Merge a pull request first. Seek forgiveness later. Review after merging. Lazy consensus also attracts more free labor because people like projects that merge fast.

My small projects practice lazy consensus.

Add cash by mail. If it turns out to be a pain in the ass, you can scrap it later, or you can improve it incrementally.
Learning from direct experiences...

[pazza83]

I am keen to come to a decision on this by the end of this cycle.

I am proposing the add CBM as a payment option to Bisq. This seems to be roughly in line with the majority consensus.

It would be great to have @bisq-network/mediators input @huey735, @huey735, @Bisq-knight, @wiz and @leo816 please let me know if you have any concerns regarding mediating CBM trades.

[pazza83]

As per proposal for existing payment method editing process and estimated timelines

I am recommending this payment method for addition.

No concerns have been raised from @bisq-network/mediators so would like to make plans for getting this added in the next cycle.

@huey735, @huey735, @Bisq-knight, @wiz and @leo816 if you do have any concerns share them on this issue before the end of the cycle 27th Dec 2020.

[pazza83]

Thanks to @jmacxx who has started working to implement this 👍

[pazza83]

Hi the first draft of the Cash by Mail Wiki for Bisq is online

Please share your thoughts.

I am wondering if phone number should also be included at the payment account creation stage so that this can be passed on the the courier. Would Sellers of BTC using cash by mail be happy to share their phone number with the buyer / courier company to facilitate a smooth delivery?

[crocket]

Phone numbers can be included, but you shouldn't enforce or validate it.

[pazza83]

I think then best to leave for traders to communicate in trader chat. Numbers might change also depending on preferences at the time of trading.

[pazza83]

Cash by mail is now possible with Bisq https://bisq.wiki/Cash_by_mail