What new payment methods would you like added to Bisq?

[pazza83]

Description

I have recently taken on the role of researching new payment methods that can be added to Bisq and am looking to get ideas from Bisq users about what payment method they would like added.

If you would like to buy or sell using a particular payment method that is not available on Bisq please let me know.

What payment methods can be added?

To secure the trade protocol for all users it is vital that Bisq only uses payment methods with no or a very low risk of chargeback. Payments methods that make chargebacks easy to initiate for users eg PayPal are not suitable for Bisq.

Low chargeback risks are deemed as payment methods which are difficult for buyers to reverse. For example they would need to report their account as compromised / hacked for a chargeback to even be considered. For low chargeback payment methods Bisq uses a 'account signing' to mitigate risks to traders.

The trade protocol also requires the BTC buyer to state the Bisq Trade ID in the payment reference / description for the seller. This means payment methods need a reference / description for the seller.

Payment methods that provide quick transactions are also preferable as they add to user experience, and also reduce the potential for either party pulling out of the trade. Currently Bisq has payment methods with transaction times between 1 hour and 6 days.

Bisq is strongly No KYC. Any payment methods that require traders to request additional information from their trade counterparty (address info, passport, Selfies!! etc would not be suitable on Bisq)

The above are just based on my opinion of using Bisq so please feel free to let me know if you disagree with any of the above.

What type of payment methods are preferred?

Ideally new payment methods added to Bisq would:

Increase liquidity in existing markets Open up new markets Attract new traders of that particular payment method to Bisq

It would also be good to know if anyone has ideas for any multi-currency payment methods that would allow users to trade with more than one currency such as Revolut, Uphold etc

Please feel free to suggest any ideas you think would be popular on Bisq

[an-dutra]

I think you could add payobeer payments, I will use it! :D

[ElucGeek]

In my opinion, we, the Swiss people, need Twint.

Switzerland Payment Methods: Twint is taking over in Switzerland, it would be nice to have it as a payment method for Swiss users. 3.5 million active TWINT users (Swiss population 8.5 million)

Twint, as far as i understand it: 20/32 - 62.5%

* No risk of chargeback +2

* Way to verify the sender in the received payment and ability to enter a reference +2

* Instant payment +2

* Singular Fiat currency (CHF) +1

* Large user base +2 (Actually: **huge** user base)

* High usability and great user experience +2

* Some KYC required (proof of address, ID, selfie) for sending and receiving payments -2

* Trades are as safe and secure for as many users as possible +2

* Traders can provide evidence of payment / receipt +1

* No minimum limits +2

* Maximum limits equal to at least 0.01 BTC +1 - _Warning: Because Twint is a interbank app: there is different limits. For example prepaid (no banks) app is limited to 5'000CHF per year._

* Likely to open markets for different countries and currencies (Switzerland - CHF) +2

* Low risk of mediation +1

* < low risk for traders from government agencies -2

* No fees for transactions +2

* No changes needed to trade protocol +2

Hi @bitpaint , thanks for the suggestion, I was looking into this payment method in the list and was very surprise not to find it when I see the huge list already implemented. It has some limits but it's perfect for new Bitcoin user that want to step in quickly and without additional KYC. Unfortunately I'm not a dev so I cannot help much to implement it but it should be quite easy as the only information needed to send money is a mobile phone number. I strongly support this proposal and hope someone can work on it eventually.

[pazza83]

Hi @ElucGeek thanks for the proposal of Twint, I will add it to my list of payment methods to look into.

[pazza83]

payobeer

Hi @an-dutra do you mean Payoneer if so they reject incoming payments from individuals are open accept payments from business so do not think they would work well for Bisq.

[bitpaint]

"the only information needed to send money is a mobile phone number"

The mobile phone owner might also generate a QR CODE/ invoice, in this case he wont leak (directly) his phone number. It's stillt tied somewhere in the account. but it wanted to make this more clear.

[zonklift]

After attempting two Amazon eGift card trades, both times my Amazon account was frozen as suspicious. I'm not sure what the secret is to making these successful trades. Both trades were resolved with a physical gift card bought at a local store and entering the code into the trader chat.

Is there anything wrong with simply defaulting to using physical Amazon cards bought locally with cash, and sending the seller the code through chat, instead of attempting to use the Amazon email/text feature? This would solve any technical issues and keep one's amazon account free from this activity (and can buy the amazon gift card with cash without an account).

[smagpro]

As mentioned above, TWINT (Switzerland) would be great !

[pazza83]

@smagpro feel free to make a new payment method suggestion here

• Edit: No need to one has already been posted. Hopefully it can be used as a payment method in Bisq 2 when it is released in a few months.

[pazza83]

Sounds like a good method of payment but how can you ensure the BTC buyer did not withdraw their own funds from the ATM?

[pazza83]

But that way a dishonest seller could withdraw from the ATM, never approve the transaction and claim they never withdrew the fiat.

Payment methods used on Bisq need some sort of proof that the payment was exchanged.

[skaunov]

I was surprised to see that Faster payments is tied to UK only. Is it possible to clone it with RF version? Would a separate issue help this process?

AFAIK the difference of it from national bank transfers are following.

• receiver cellphone number processing requirement instead of account data
• lower fee, faster processing, some flexibility in receiver settings

TODO would be really nice to have a second opinion that Faster payments are absolutely on par with national bank transfers in terms of chargebacks; I feel it's so

[pazza83]

TODO would be really nice to have a second opinion that Faster payments are absolutely on par with national bank transfers in terms of chargebacks; I feel it's so

Hi @skaunov thanks for the feedback

Other Russian payment methods proposed include:

• Alfa-Bank
• VTB
• Sherbank
• Tinkoff
• YooMoney
• Qiwi

Any ideas what would be most popular to be used?

Currently there are very few trades on Bisq for RUB.

[skaunov]

Wow, in email my reply looked much better. Let me just redo it.

Thanks for swift reply!

Currently there are very few trades on Bisq for RUB.

I guess it's chicken and egg as always. Also I may be very wrong, but Russia really needs a system with high level of scam protection and also permissionless.

Any ideas what would be most popular to be used?

The one I mentioned initially is hold by CB and any individual customer expects it from his bank. It's an extension/iteration of national banking transfers in many sense, so it's the one most ubiquitous. Let me go through the list. Most of them are just particular bank systems for transfers between own customers (so it's same bank method which already present).

After populating the list I got the idea that adding optional field "transfer by phone number" should cover most same bank transfers. Though I guess it should be analysed what data does it require instead (name, account number would not be needed in this case usually), and what info on sender does it reveal to the receiver.

Other Russian payment methods proposed include:

* Alfa-Bank

* VTB

* Sberbank

* Tinkoff

All of the above are same bank of a respective popular bank.

* YooMoney

Payment system built and sold by Yandex. Provide some facilities to receive money via phone number, and maybe wallet number and some number of integrations. Am not really into it.

* Qiwi

International payment system. IIRC has some problems now. Was built around phone numbers, though should have number of integrations.

[pazza83]

Thanks for the feedback.

Do you think the Russian Faster Payment method it the one that most Russian's will have access to and will have the most take-up of the above payment methods?

[skaunov]

My feelings/reasoning says yes. Though it's my own biased opinion without relying on any statistics. Note that it's known under its Russian name in Cyrillic (see that link; transliterated "SBP"). Is it possible to use Russian in Bisq? Never thought about translations tbh.

As a deeper answer I'd say that there three most popular instant transfer methods: Faster payments, Card-to-card, Sberbank same bank. Same bank is same bank as usual; card-to-card could be more private as takes only the card number, but incurs higher fees than Faster.

[skaunov]

Also it would be beneficial to add the names of this top banks in UI along with their BIC. I mean when the BIC been input it could show the logo near it and/or name. It will provide much better experience and is small in development and negligible maintenance for three banks, while cover majority of struggling on this direction.

[sroo8]

Could we have 99.9% gold and silver bullion as payment methods? It would be very similar to the current "Cash By Mail" payment method in that the bullion would need to be physically posted, and there may be some geographical restrictions.

There are standard currency codes XAU and XAG (gold and silver) for pricing bullion per troy ounce.

[pazza83]

Could we have 99.9% gold and silver bullion as payment methods?

This would be very hard to mediate if there was an issue with weight / purity etc. I cannot see it working with the current multsig trade protocol.

[sroo8]

Could we have 99.9% gold and silver bullion as payment methods?

This would be very hard to mediate if there was an issue with weight / purity etc. I cannot see it working with the current multsig trade protocol.

I'm not convinced that this reasoning holds true. That is, I cannot see how bullion as payment payment would be inherently more riskier than existing payment methods on Bisq e.g. cash by mail.

All bullion grade precious metals are clearly stamped with both weight and purity. In many countries this is a legal requirement.

There are typically only two weight units. Troy ounce and metric grams. For simplicity only troy ounce could be used as it's more popular, and the conversion is simple.

With regard to purity. Bullion grade bars and coins are almost always 99.9+% purity for both gold and silver.

I work with a large group (2000+ members) of precious metal traders who have expressed interest in having a trusted third party to mediate trades. Bisq could be an ideal platform if it catered for precious metals (gold and silver).

[pazza83]

I admit that my knowledge of gold and silver is very limited.

I work with a large group (2000+ members) of precious metal traders who have expressed interest in having a trusted third party to mediate trades. Bisq could be an ideal platform if it catered for precious metals (gold and silver).

Can you tell me a little more about what problem you are trying to solve for these traders. I do not like the idea of Bisq being a trusted third party for such trades. Cash by mail trades do work for Bisq but they are often more difficult to mediate than say bitcoin <-> altcoin or fiat trades, due to their physical nature.

What are the current services people are using gold / silver peer to peer trades, if such a service exists.

[sroo8]

Can you tell me a little more about what problem you are trying to solve for these traders. I do not like the idea of Bisq being a trusted third party for such trades. Cash by mail trades do work for Bisq but they are often more difficult to mediate than say bitcoin <-> altcoin or fiat trades, due to their physical nature.

What are the current services people are using gold / silver peer to peer trades, if such a service exists.

The way we've traditionally traded has been through internet forums. People gain a reputation through trading feedback with other members, and by posting content on forums. Over time they become more trusted. Trust is earned by trading feedback score + posts + length of forum membership. Apart from feedback score, there is no system to gauge trust, it is entirely a heuristic.

A new (untrusted) member who has never traded before will usually be limited to low value transactions, and will be asked for payment to clear before shipping. It's obviously risky if a new member trades with another new member.

Most of the time bullion is posted domestically. If the bullion buyer has a low reputation then the seller will require payment to clear before shipment. Otherwise they may ship before payment. There's always a risk that the seller takes the funds and abandons their account. It has happened a few times over the 10+ years that I've been trading. Other members never know what happened, they may have died for all we know.

In terms of shipping insurance. Sellers will usually provide this at a cost price.

Often traders are looking for crypto to bullion trades or vice versa. Which is why I saw Bisq as a good fit.

The only real alternative to trading on forums is to sell back to bullion dealers. They typically buy back at many percent below the bullion's spot price. i.e. their buyback prices are not very attractive.

If you were to implement bullion trades I would be a vocal proponent of my members trading on Bisq for all their crypto/bullion trades.

[skaunov]

The idea of "bullions by mail" is entertaining, it was cute to read the proposal. @sroo8 ! I also understand @pazza83 concerns. I would direct you to Particl with their Marketplace and BasicSwap as they are more suitable for your case (am not sure, but their MAD approach looks even more suitable to you) and could be more happy to have you in the community (in terms of making your life easier with specific features).

Personally I know to less about cash by mail method, but can imagine committing to bank notes (via numbers) and sending from a hiding address/endpoint/post-office. And this could be really helpful in mediating when cash is fake. (You need to be quite fast to produce the notes with the same numbers, and it seems infeasible currently with the grade of cash by mail popularity.) But what to do with the fake metals? Is it possible to commit to it (radio emissions sounds complicated if they're a way)? Anyway it's an cute topic for some "mind gymnastics".

Feel free to reach out, also I shared the link with that project in case they're interested.

[sroo8]

I would direct you to Particl with their Marketplace and BasicSwap as they are more suitable for your case (am not sure, but their MAD approach looks even more suitable to you) and could be more happy to have you in the community (in terms of making your life easier with specific features).

Thanks. I'll investigate Particl.

Personally I know to less about cash by mail method, but can imagine committing to bank notes (via numbers) and sending from a hiding address/endpoint/post-office. And this could be really helpful in mediating when cash is fake. (You need to be quite fast to produce the notes with the same numbers, and it seems infeasible currently with the grade of cash by mail popularity.) But what to do with the fake metals? Is it possible to commit to it (radio emissions sounds complicated if they're a way)? Anyway it's an cute topic for some "mind gymnastics".

I would imagine the cash-by-mail method poses an almost identical risk to what bullion by mail would. Given that serial numbers on notes could be faked / copied.

Most bullion traders can immediately spot fakes. Even first time traders can spot fakes in government minted coins (i.e. 1oz Silver Eagles, 1oz Canadian Maples, Perth Mint coins ... etc). Chinese fakes exist but they are such poor copies that almost anyone can spot them. Because most of these gov minted coins are also legal tender, faking them comes with serious criminal / counterfeiting charges.

Many traders have access to XRF testing machines (X-ray Fluorescence) that quickly identify purity. In my 10+ years of bullion experience I have only heard of a couple of cases where traders have attempted to pass-off fakes, and they were quickly spotted.

[pazza83]

(am not sure, but their MAD approach looks even more suitable to you)

Yes, I agreed a MAD protocol would be a good option as it removes the need for a mediator / trusted party to complete the trade.

[skaunov]

That's cool! My second thought was actually if you consider bullions more like a good or more like a payment media. I feel like Bisq is much more suited for payment media.

I would imagine the cash-by-mail method poses an almost identical risk to what bullion by mail would. Given that serial numbers on notes could be faked / copied.

Yes and no. Committing to the number will let arbitrage to understand which side provided the fake since manufacturing fakes in the narrow window between receiving the parcel and raising the ticket doesn't look as a profitable strategy/tactic. Though I bet no such commitment is implemented since the method isn't that popular anyway.

With bullion I have no idea how to understand did the seller received fake metal or faking the claim. Also I just understood for cash commitment it's required a trusted verifier between sender and receiver... So you're right --- pretty the same.

Sounds more like a good to me. I afraid that idea of spending gold will scale much faster than the competence of the traders community you describe. And it brings that obvious risks for scamming in the gap. That's why I can understand skepsis for Bisq becoming trusted party in this.

Most bullion traders can immediately spot fakes. ...

Many traders have access to XRF testing machines (X-ray Fluorescence) ...

[sroo8]

Sounds more like a good to me. I afraid that idea of spending gold will scale much faster than the competence of the traders community you describe. And it brings that obvious risks for scamming in the gap. That's why I can understand skepsis for Bisq becoming trusted party in this.

I can only say that calling bullion a 'good' stems from a lack of understanding / experience. Government minted coins are typically classified as legal tender and have the legal protections as such.

Although gold and silver are not in common circulation today, they have been regarded as money for thousands of years prior to Fiat based monetary systems. Unlike goods, bullion shares much of the 'money' characteristics that make Bitcoin (and other cryptos) attractive. Portable, fungible, dense, censor resistant ... etc.

I still say there is no more risk in trading bullion <--> crypto than there is with cash or even digital payment methods. Any perceived risks are probably founded in fearing the unknown. Additionally the minimal risks could be further mitigated by limiting the types of bullion to government issued bullion that has legal tender status.

[skaunov]

I'm mostly agree with you, and I guess it would make the world better if the situation with insane enforced centralized "money" was different.

My concern with metals as payment method is lack of infrastructure for it. I really afraid that advance in processing and chemistry made it much harder to believe that what I receive real gold (or any other appropriate metal) and not a cheaper forgery. I understand that it's not easy to fool you, but I'm not so sure in myself. And without such infrastructure you can guess where it's heading. It's an entertaining question how such an infrastructure can be build (and whether Bisq should pioneer it), but it's obvious states/government want precisely opposite. (It's another entertaining question why those nice features you mentioned are preserved. I wonder how well nominal and real values of those coins your mentioned.)

Ofc bullion are more fiat money then what we already used to call by that name, at least linguistically. And if they weren't somewhere in-between goods and payment media we weren't discussing it. You're right, but I like to think about it in more infrastructural way. If you don't lend it, transfer, buying something with it, paying with it, but buy and trade it on some forums, than it seems like it will be kind of problematic to integrate it in a system which designed for payments processing (at least yet). From this perspective cash by mail is a good too, btw. How does it differ? But "postal orders" are much more payment like (though you need a post office for both).

[sroo8]

My concern with metals as payment method is lack of infrastructure for it. I really afraid that advance in processing and chemistry made it much harder to believe that what I receive real gold (or any other appropriate metal) and not a cheaper forgery. I understand that it's not easy to fool you, but I'm not so sure in myself.

There is no known chemistry that can fake gold or silver (AKA alchemy).

In reality fake bullion is easier to spot than counterfeit cash. Also the infrastructure for testing is very cheap and can be easily 3D printed for around 45¢ in materials. Or one can be purchased on Amazon for $14.

Alternatively there are even APPs that can test bullion coins using the sound.

Again, I think the fear that bullion would be a vector for 'risks for scamming in the gap' are probably unfounded and arise from fear of unknown.

https://apps.apple.com/us/app/precious-coin-tester/id1474466880

3D printed a ping tester

[skaunov]

You're wrong: alchemists stated goal wasn't to fake gold (and some other materials) but to get genuine one from (transmuting) other (preferably cheap) materials. On the other hand history of faking is basically as long as the history of bullion itself.

My concern with metals as payment method is lack of infrastructure for it. I really afraid that advance in processing and chemistry made it much harder to believe that what I receive real gold (or any other appropriate metal) and not a cheaper forgery. I understand that it's not easy to fool you, but I'm not so sure in myself.

There is no known chemistry that can fake gold or silver (AKA alchemy).

Yeah, of course. I really would be glad if your thing will succeed!

Again, I think the fear that bullion would be a vector for 'risks for scamming in the gap' are probably unfounded and arise from fear of unknown.

Ah, that's why we call proofs sound! X)

https://apps.apple.com/us/app/precious-coin-tester/id1474466880

3D printed a ping tester

[skaunov]

Yep, not trying to fake it...

The definition for alchemist: a person who attempts to to change ordinary metals into gold.

Lots of them ofc. Though I believe many of them were scientists of the era and it was their "front" for natural studies. AFAIU chemistry had a lot from alchemy on its start.

In reality alchemists would have settled for a product that was in all practical aspects indistinguishable from gold, regardless of whether it was 'genuine'.

I should note that I find your choice of a place for alchemy discussion quite weird. I believe it's the moment for @pazza83 to interfere and keep the discussion on topic of Bisq and payment methods.

[pazza83]

@sroo8

Chatted though the feasibility of adding gold and silver with one of the devs.

I think at this stage it is not feasible for a few reasons:

• Difficultly mediating / arbitrating these trades
• Difficulty pulling in a gold/btc or silver/btc price
• Offers would have to be for a fixed amount rather than a dynamic amount based on changing market prices

Would be good to see it added in the future but I do not think the current trade protocol is suitable.

If you would like to discuss further maybe make create a new proposal issue here https://github.com/bisq-network/proposals/issues

A guide to creating proposals can be seen here: https://bisq.wiki/Proposals

Many thanks

[sroo8]

I think at this stage it is not feasible for a few reasons:

* Difficultly mediating / arbitrating these trades

Already discussed. Should present no more difficulty / risk than cash-by-mail.

* Difficulty pulling in a gold/btc or silver/btc price

On this point. Gold and silver have their own ISO 4217 currency codes. XAU=gold, XAG=silver. I know most currency feed providers have these codes (e.g. openexchangerates.org).

* Offers would have to be for a fixed amount rather than a dynamic amount based on changing market prices

I would counter this point by saying it's closely related to the previous 'pulling in a gold/btc' prices. If XAU and XAG price data were available, it should be no different to any other dynamic price.

[skaunov]

I have just put together a list of requirements to consider when adding new payment methods.

Currently their is not documentation around what does / does not make a good payment method so this is my attempt to share my current thoughts as to what should be considered when adding new payment methods.

@pazza83 , I couldn't find how to copy the table to make the move similar to https://github.com/bisq-network/growth/issues/220#issuecomment-824383563. Could you teach me to copy it, or move its code to a gist and link it in that comment, idk.

[pazza83]

I have just put together a list of requirements to consider when adding new payment methods. Currently their is not documentation around what does / does not make a good payment method so this is my attempt to share my current thoughts as to what should be considered when adding new payment methods.

@pazza83 , I couldn't find how to copy the table to make the move similar to bisq-network/growth#220 (comment). Could you teach me to copy it, or move its code to a gist and link it in that comment, idk.

| 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~~ | **Way to verify the sender in the received payment and ability to enter a 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**  | ~~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 for sending and receiving payments** | ~~No KYC required for sending and receiving payments, 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) for sending and receiving payments~~  |
| **Low risk of scam attempts**  | ~~Very low risk of scam attempts~~  | ~~< low risk of scam attempts~~ |
| **Traders can provide evidence of payment / receipt**  | ~~Traders can provide evidence of payment / receipt and 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 increase liquidity and 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 should not be a barrier to trading~~  | **No fees for transactions**  | ~~Fees will be a barrier to trading~~  |
| ~~Only minor changes needed to trade protocol~~  | **No changes needed to trade protocol**  | ~~> Minor changes needed to trade protocol~~  |

[skaunov]

Way to verify the sender in the received payment and ability to enter a reference

I wonder if this line should be edited/removed. Since my impression from the wiki is that currently narrative (or reference) is discourage, and we actually desire methods which let not to include narrative, and then those which require to include a generic one, and requiring more is a disadvantage. @pazza83

[pazza83]

@skaunov Yes, well spotted. It should be removed as now the rules are to not send information with the payment so a reference is not needed.

[github-actions[bot]]

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.

[github-actions[bot]]

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