AML/KYC provider for the Delegation Program

Mina Foundation has recently released a Delegation Program Improvement Plan that will be rolled out over the next months. The blog post with the details the can be found here:

One of the improvements to the program will be conducting AML/KYC procedure on Applicants. As stated in the blog post:

The purpose of this is to reduce the possibility of bad actors trying to set up multiple accounts to participate and to improve the trust in the system. The Mina Foundation has identified an AML/KYC partner and will be requiring each block producer participating in the Delegation Program to pass its AML/KYC check before receiving staking rewards from the Mina Protocol before the next delegation cycle begins.

Can we know the name of the company that will provide AML/KYC checks?

May 17, 2022, edited for clarity:
I have added my message from Mina Discord: Mina Protocol

As we all know, Coinlist was the company that was conducting KYC procedures for the GFM token program, Prism token program and Mina grants.

Unfortunately Coinlist is on track to become one of the worst performing companies in the crypto industry with the record number of negative reviews and complaints including missing funds, lack of transparency and no customer support.

The reason for my post is the concern that Coinlist will be chosen again as an AML/KYC provider for the Delegation Program.

What will be the outcome of choosing Coinlist as a KYC provider?

A lot of the Mina validators, both well known in the community and the new ones, will not be able to participate in the Delegation Program, because Coinlist has blocked their accounts without prior notice and with no explanation. No replies to support tickets have been provided.

This raises serious concerns about the integrity, transparency and trust towards this platform. I have created a thread at AML/KYC provider for the Delegation Program to discuss this issue. ’

Even if you are not a validator, please take a minute to register at Mina Research forum and share you opinion on this. Please support your validators by SAYING NO to Coinlist as a KYC provider for the Delegation Program.


I saw your concern about the KYC provider on discord. I mostly agree with your points.

But using KYC is still better than to keep giving MF delegations in the dark, because the system is too easy to abuse.

Also, KYC alone is easy to abuse too. And it is probably not the best way to achieve validator selection.

In my opinion, it is an old fashon procedure mostly brought in the crypto space by regulators. It is a poor tool that we should avoid as much as possible.
In addition, uptime is not enough too, I don’t see how a validator with 99.99% serves better the ecosystem than one with 99.97%.

I think delegations should reward commitment to the project. It can be measured in multiple ways:

  • participation in discord and here
  • skin in the game (minimal stake)
  • history in the Mina community
  • uptime (minimum threshold like 99%)
  • documentation / communication (twitter, youtube, web, etc)

I hope KYC is just one step in the right direction and that we will design delegation rules that serve better MINA.


I share the coinlist concerns.

And yes, coinlist/tokensoft KYCs can be abused

There was a video call for more than 600+ GFMs, I hope the similar process is applicable to the delegation (especially since there will be 240 places only)


This is how Coinlist grows their customer base:

Translation: this person says the business is going very well, he has just registered 340 accounts for the new token sale (all KYCed)

Kazakhstan, 20 different accounts from one IP address, but different devices (antidetect browser), there were no bans.

I think just sticking to coinlist is lazy and on top and has been a little shady with jump in numbers. There are multiple KYC services available and a few more options should be provided , I honestly don’t even understand why is this not being considered.

1 Like