Spaceship.com - Marketplace Thread

[DomainRecap]

Spaceship.com recently launched a new Marketplace section, and as NamePros has given me the go-head, I think the company deserves its own thread for NP domain marketplace users to converse in.

https://www.spaceship.com/sellerhub/

Personally speaking, I will be setting up a new Spaceship.com account this weekend and going to work investigating its various features, options and policies.

 

[End Game]

Good to see Spaceship.com launching a dedicated marketplace section.

I’ve just listed a domain there myself — still waiting to see if any responses come in from potential buyers. Curious to know how active the marketplace really is.

Has anybody here already managed to sell a domain through Spaceship? Would be great to hear first-hand experiences with visibility, inquiries, and overall buyer activity.

I’ve listed 100. No offers yet. I think it’s all type in at this point.

 

[Simon SE]

Sold one on Spaceship last week. Like the platform and the chat feature with buyer.

 

[CashproofAi]

Sold one on Spaceship last week. Like the platform and the chat feature with buyer.

Great to hear that. Keep going . Best of luck.

 

[4L.com]

@Marina Savina @Spaceship
Hello. I just received this email:

I hold over 18,000 liquid 4-letter .COM domains at Spaceship, all listed in your marketplace. You earn commission on these sales, and buyers may stay with you for renewals and add-ons. The inbound traffic to these parked domains also benefits your brand both directly and indirectly.

Twice since April 2025, you have locked my entire account "for anti-fraud" unless I complete identity verification through a third-party site, magic.veriff.me. I made it clear the first time that I am not willing to upload scans of my government ID to a vendor I did not choose. (The first time it was the same nonsense. I topped up my own account using USDC, received the funds in my account, and right after that I got a block with suspicion of fraudulent activity. When I asked support to explain what exactly was fraudulent in the chain where I funded my account with my own money, I just got a generic reply, and then the block was lifted.) But this time you have completely crossed all reasonable boundaries.

What concerns me is that this verification is aimed at the wrong party. When a marketplace transaction looks risky, it makes sense to verify the buyer and their payment method - not the existing domain owner who did not initiate the payment and is using your own marketplace for transactions. This blanket lock is highly disruptive. It interferes with ongoing sales - the same sales that generate revenue for you. And I have heard many times claims like "the highest data-protection standards", "we never sell or share data", and other similar boilerplate. I have seen such statements from very large companies, only to later witness breaches or deliberate data monetization revealed.

As a matter of principle, I never give scans of my documents to anyone, and never will, except where it is absolutely unavoidable by law and strictly necessary. That is exactly what I strongly advise others to do as well. You are not a bank or law enforcement to demand such sensitive documents, and if your vendor or you were to disappear tomorrow, my personal data could end up exposed on the internet indefinitely.

To be clear: if this cannot be resolved in a privacy-respecting way (for example, as I suggested to your support team back in April after the first restriction: top up my Spaceship balance via bank transfer or card payment, where my full legal name appears clearly on the sender/payer record. That should be more than enough to confirm that the name on my account matches my identity), I will have no issue transferring these domains to another registrar and selling them on other platforms.

I am sharing this so others can understand what kind of surprises they might face with Spaceship under the current policy, in a situation where they sell their domains on Spaceship platform and, in order to receive the money, have to waste time proving something.

 

[Optinom]

I sold my first domain via Spaceship a couple of days ago. The name used Afternic landers.

@Marina Savina @Spaceship

I'm interested in knowing what % of sales come via 1. Namecheap reg path 2. Spaceship reg path (We can ignore sales via landers).

My guess is 90%+ should be coming via Namecheap reg path. The search volumes are in line with this, and I wonder why you wouldn't give us (sellers) the option to use Namecheap branded landing pages? Namecheap, as the second largest registrar has a much higher brand awareness.

Give the option to sellers. Some sellers might prefer Spaceship, but people like me may choose Namecheap.

 

[love4ever]

.

 

[NYJimbo]

Please try to export the leasing data.

 

[MarkedMarket]

@Marina Savina @Spaceship
Hello. I just received this email:
Show attachment 284503

Show attachment 284504
I hold over 18,000 liquid 4-letter .COM domains at Spaceship, all listed in your marketplace. You earn commission on these sales, and buyers may stay with you for renewals and add-ons. The inbound traffic to these parked domains also benefits your brand both directly and indirectly.

Twice since April 2025, you have locked my entire account "for anti-fraud" unless I complete identity verification through a third-party site, magic.veriff.me. I made it clear the first time that I am not willing to upload scans of my government ID to a vendor I did not choose. (The first time it was the same nonsense. I topped up my own account using USDC, received the funds in my account, and right after that I got a block with suspicion of fraudulent activity. When I asked support to explain what exactly was fraudulent in the chain where I funded my account with my own money, I just got a generic reply, and then the block was lifted.) But this time you have completely crossed all reasonable boundaries.

What concerns me is that this verification is aimed at the wrong party. When a marketplace transaction looks risky, it makes sense to verify the buyer and their payment method - not the existing domain owner who did not initiate the payment and is using your own marketplace for transactions. This blanket lock is highly disruptive. It interferes with ongoing sales - the same sales that generate revenue for you. And I have heard many times claims like "the highest data-protection standards", "we never sell or share data", and other similar boilerplate. I have seen such statements from very large companies, only to later witness breaches or deliberate data monetization revealed.

As a matter of principle, I never give scans of my documents to anyone, and never will, except where it is absolutely unavoidable by law and strictly necessary. That is exactly what I strongly advise others to do as well. You are not a bank or law enforcement to demand such sensitive documents, and if your vendor or you were to disappear tomorrow, my personal data could end up exposed on the internet indefinitely.

To be clear: if this cannot be resolved in a privacy-respecting way (for example, as I suggested to your support team back in April after the first restriction: top up my Spaceship balance via bank transfer or card payment, where my full legal name appears clearly on the sender/payer record. That should be more than enough to confirm that the name on my account matches my identity), I will have no issue transferring these domains to another registrar and selling them on other platforms.

I am sharing this so others can understand what kind of surprises they might face with Spaceship under the current policy, in a situation where they sell their domains on Spaceship platform and, in order to receive the money, have to waste time proving something.

Fully agree with all of the above. There are often so many weaknesses in software and organizational processes that attackers can exploit to gain unauthorized access and steal data, that you have to be very mindful of sending your ID to an organization that you don't know anything about. Think also about social engineering attacks and the many data breaches that we read about in the news (and that's only the ones disclosed).

I noticed that in the couple of interactions I've had with Spaceship's helpdesk, the team members had Ukrainian first names. That shouldn't be a surprise as Namecheap has more than 2000 employees in Ukraine (see screenshot below).

But it does show that we do not know what exactly happens to our confidential and private data when we send it to any employee in any organization, and what sort of borders it crosses. And as such, when it doesn't seem to be necessary for a domain name platform to legally require this sort of information (I never had to do this for Atom, GoDaddy and/or DAN), you have to ask yourself whether it's worth the risks. For me, it would be a big no, and if Spaceship would be truly enforcing this, I would certainly never use their platform.

 

[MarkedMarket]

And to add something more on Spaceship: I found the helpdesk members very quick to respond and very helpful and friendly in general.

However, I find Spaceship's interface very non-intuitive and messy. It tries to be too clever with "unboxing" of your domains and all that sort of stuff. Keep it easy and simple.

The launchpad is also messy with all the different apps that don't seem to be mutually exclusive (e.g. the "domain manager" and "domain portfolio" app should be the same). It's all additional extra layers that make it very cumbersome to navigate.

I also don't like the fact that buyers see the seller's first name in their offer negotiations - instead of the more generic word "seller". It doesn't look professional.

And as other's have already mentioned: it takes a long time before the SSL certificate becomes active (if at all) and the landers load slowly.

Overall, Spaceship has still quite a lot of work to do to make their platform (and underlying infrastructure) simple, intuitive, professional and fast.

 

[4L.com]

And as such, when it doesn't seem to be necessary for a domain name platform to legally require this sort of information (I never had to do this for Atom, GoDaddy and/or DAN), you have to ask yourself whether it's worth the risks. For me, it would be a big no, and if Spaceship would be truly enforcing this, I would certainly never use their platform.

I have had a similar experience. Over the last 3 years, while I was actively selling domains, I managed to do so on the Dynadot, Dan, Atom, and Afternic platforms, and not once was my account restricted or was I asked to provide my personal documents - even though the amounts there were much larger than what I have accumulated at Spaceship.

The funniest part is that I have never even withdrawn funds from the Spaceship platform during all the time I've used it (I do not even have any payout method selected in my account settings). So, "potential fraud" means that I spend the funds from my balance, received from selling my domains in the Spaceship marketplace, on renewing all my other domains that are in my Spaceship account (all 18k+ domains are renewed until 2027+). But after the restrictions, I cannot use my own balance. I cannot transfer new domains into Spaceship, and I cannot renew the domains already in my account. Luckily, they were renewed in advance; otherwise, in such a situation, I could have simply lost some of them if their expiration dates had fallen during this period. The situation has still not been resolved, and the sold domain (because of the sale of which my account was restricted) was transferred to Spaceship from my Dynadot account back on May 21, 2025 - more than 4 months ago, which is also hard to see as anything suspicious.

 

[MarkedMarket]

I have had a similar experience. Over the last 3 years, while I was actively selling domains, I managed to do so on the Dynadot, Dan, Atom, and Afternic platforms, and not once was my account restricted or was I asked to provide my personal documents - even though the amounts there were much larger than what I have accumulated at Spaceship.

The funniest part is that I have never even withdrawn funds from the Spaceship platform during all the time I've used it (I do not even have any payout method selected in my account settings). So, "potential fraud" means that I spend the funds from my balance, received from selling my domains in the Spaceship marketplace, on renewing all my other domains that are in my Spaceship account (all 18k+ domains are renewed until 2027+). But after the restrictions, I cannot use my own balance. I cannot transfer new domains into Spaceship, and I cannot renew the domains already in my account. Luckily, they were renewed in advance; otherwise, in such a situation, I could have simply lost some of them if their expiration dates had fallen during this period. The situation has still not been resolved, and the sold domain (because of the sale of which my account was restricted) was transferred to Spaceship from my Dynadot account back on May 21, 2025 - more than 4 months ago, which is also hard to see as anything suspicious.

Apart from the unnecessary ID verification request, you would expect Spaceship to treat their customers, especially large ones, well and always provide them at least with the benefit of the doubt.

Suppose, for the sake of the argument, that you would be someone who would renew your domains at the very last minute (around 30 days after expiry) and suddenly Spaceship restricts your account without any advance warning, then you wouldn't be able to renew any of your domains. This would result in very significant Redemption Grace Period fees or even possible loss of the domain(s).

Spaceship shows with these sort of actions that they are a liability and are certainly not yet up to the standards that you would expect from a reputable domain name platform/registrar.

 

[4L.com]

@Marina Savina @Spaceship
Hello. I just received this email:
Show attachment 284503

Show attachment 284504
I hold over 18,000 liquid 4-letter .COM domains at Spaceship, all listed in your marketplace. You earn commission on these sales, and buyers may stay with you for renewals and add-ons. The inbound traffic to these parked domains also benefits your brand both directly and indirectly.

Twice since April 2025, you have locked my entire account "for anti-fraud" unless I complete identity verification through a third-party site, magic.veriff.me. I made it clear the first time that I am not willing to upload scans of my government ID to a vendor I did not choose. (The first time it was the same nonsense. I topped up my own account using USDC, received the funds in my account, and right after that I got a block with suspicion of fraudulent activity. When I asked support to explain what exactly was fraudulent in the chain where I funded my account with my own money, I just got a generic reply, and then the block was lifted.) But this time you have completely crossed all reasonable boundaries.

What concerns me is that this verification is aimed at the wrong party. When a marketplace transaction looks risky, it makes sense to verify the buyer and their payment method - not the existing domain owner who did not initiate the payment and is using your own marketplace for transactions. This blanket lock is highly disruptive. It interferes with ongoing sales - the same sales that generate revenue for you. And I have heard many times claims like "the highest data-protection standards", "we never sell or share data", and other similar boilerplate. I have seen such statements from very large companies, only to later witness breaches or deliberate data monetization revealed.

As a matter of principle, I never give scans of my documents to anyone, and never will, except where it is absolutely unavoidable by law and strictly necessary. That is exactly what I strongly advise others to do as well. You are not a bank or law enforcement to demand such sensitive documents, and if your vendor or you were to disappear tomorrow, my personal data could end up exposed on the internet indefinitely.

To be clear: if this cannot be resolved in a privacy-respecting way (for example, as I suggested to your support team back in April after the first restriction: top up my Spaceship balance via bank transfer or card payment, where my full legal name appears clearly on the sender/payer record. That should be more than enough to confirm that the name on my account matches my identity), I will have no issue transferring these domains to another registrar and selling them on other platforms.

I am sharing this so others can understand what kind of surprises they might face with Spaceship under the current policy, in a situation where they sell their domains on Spaceship platform and, in order to receive the money, have to waste time proving something.

To clarify for readers all the context and why this situation surprised me: I did not expect this kind of behavior from a subsidiary of a major registrar like Namecheap. I currently have a balance of $20,180.36 with Spaceship. These funds came from selling domains in their own marketplace, and I've already used part of the proceeds to transfer new domains to Spaceship and renew existing ones.

Over the last 30 days, I sold 17 domains on the Spaceship marketplace (out of 18,123 that are listed for sale in their marketplace and are in my account) for a total of $20,483. Spaceship's commission is 5%, i.e., $20,483 × 5% = $1,024.15. They successfully deducted this fee (their revenue), and the remaining amount was credited to my balance. For each sale I received an email confirming the payment verification procedure.

After another sale in their own marketplace, Spaceship send me email - quote "to protect you from any potential fraud" and restricted my account, including my entire balance of $20,180.36. In the name of "protecting" me, they did the following:
1) Did not credit the proceeds from the allegedly suspicious sale.
2) Blocked my access to the funds that were already on my balance from previous verified sales - the same funds for which Spaceship has already taken its commission and previously raised no concerns.

Apparently, I'm expected to submit scans of my ID documents to a third-party verification provider registered in Estonia - a jurisdiction that has been linked to multiple high-profile scandals and the misuse of shell companies. The email link directs me to complete verification on a .me subdomain (e.g., magic.veriff.me) - which is supposedly meant to reassure me that this is a well-regulated, "Swiss-watch-reliable" business. I even checked their privacy notice, which states:
"9.2 However, please note that electronic transmission or storage of information is not always 100% secure. Therefore, despite the security measures that we have put in place to protect Personal Data about you, we cannot guarantee that loss, misuse, or alteration of data will never occur."

Source: https://www.veriff.com/privacy-notice

Given that, the notion that I only become "protected" once I hand over my ID scans to a 3rd party vendor I don't trust - one that explicitly admits it can't guarantee data security - is, frankly, absurd. It's so illogical that I can't help but laugh as I write this message.

I could understand temporary limits on transferring new domains into Spaceship if they suspect something. But restricting access to my existing, verified balance - after taking their fee - makes no sense to me. This mirrors the behavior of some crypto exchanges and payment systems: they gladly accept users deposits and profits, but when a withdrawal is requested, they suddenly demand invasive verification and endless explanations.

But in my case, I wasn't even trying to withdraw the money. I planned to use it for renewals in the 2026 calendar year, which for me is the most efficient and fully legal way to minimize taxes.

This experience has seriously undermined my trust. As it stands, I'm no longer considering transferring any valuable domains - 3L, CVCV, and 3k+ other premium 4L names - to this registrar. I'd rather pay more for renewals elsewhere and be confident my assets are safe than risk receiving another "surprise" notice like this.

If this were the first time my account was restricted for dubious reasons, I might chalk it up to a one off mistake. But this is the second restriction in 5 months. And just like the first, it will likely end with no clear explanation of what, exactly, constituted "potential fraud" or where it supposedly occurred. The result is the same, though: the trust is gone, and the bad taste from these actions will stay with me forever.

 

[MarkedMarket]

Veriff, the company that agreed to a $4 million class action lawsuit settlement to resolve claims that it violated Illinois’ Biometric Information Privacy Act (BIPA) by collecting facial geometry scans without consent.

Source: https://topclassactions.com/lawsuit...riff-facial-scans-4m-class-action-settlement/

 

[Jannes]

This needs to be escalated asap, for Spaceship’s own good.

@enetwork

 

[4L.com]

I received a reply from Spaceship:
Apparently, they "are obligated to initiate the verification process in my case." In other words, they sold my domain in their marketplace and now are supposedly required to see my documents to "protect me from fraud." Then comes the nonsense about how reliable the company Veriff.com is (although in my previous message I quoted their own policy, where it clearly says they do not even guarantee the security of the data) and that they can request anything "government-issued photo identification and/or government-issued business identification, plus whatever else We deem required and necessary, in order to verify Your identity".

In short, I have removed all my domains from the Spaceship marketplace. I will wait to see what public response comes from a Spaceship representative, because selling domains on a platform where my funds from those sales get blocked seems like a very questionable idea.

 

[4L.com]

Also, the points from their own documents that they refer to in the letter:

https://www.spaceship.com/legal/privacy-policy/
"Our site has security measures in place to protect the loss, misuse and alteration of the information under our control. We use 128-bit SSL security to encrypt any transmissions when you provide credit card information, personal data, etc. No method of electronic storage or transmission over the internet is 100% secure, however. Therefore, we cannot guarantee its absolute security."

https://www.spaceship.com/legal/universal-terms-of-service-agreement/
"IN NO EVENT SHALL SPACESHIP, ITS OFFICERS, DIRECTORS, EMPLOYEES, AGENTS, AND ALL THIRD PARTY SERVICE PROVIDERS, BE LIABLE TO YOU OR ANY OTHER PERSON OR ENTITY FOR ANY DIRECT, INDIRECT, INCIDENTAL, SPECIAL, PUNITIVE, OR CONSEQUENTIAL DAMAGES WHATSOEVER, INCLUDING ANY THAT MAY RESULT FROM (I) THE ACCURACY, COMPLETENESS, OR CONTENT OF THIS SITE, (II) THE ACCURACY, COMPLETENESS, OR CONTENT OF ANY SITES LINKED (THROUGH HYPERLINKS, BANNER ADVERTISING OR OTHERWISE) TO THIS SITE, (III) OUR SERVICES WHETHER FOUND AT THIS SITE OR ANY SITES LINKED (THROUGH HYPERLINKS, BANNER ADVERTISING OR OTHERWISE) TO THIS SITE, (IV) PERSONAL INJURY OR PROPERTY DAMAGE OF ANY NATURE WHATSOEVER, (V) THIRD-PARTY CONDUCT OF ANY NATURE WHATSOEVER, (VI) ANY UNAUTHORIZED ACCESS TO OR USE OF OUR SERVERS AND/OR ANY AND ALL CONTENT, PERSONAL INFORMATION, FINANCIAL INFORMATION OR OTHER INFORMATION AND DATA STORED THEREIN, (VII) ANY INTERRUPTION OR CESSATION OF SERVICES TO OR FROM THIS SITE OR ANY SITES LINKED (THROUGH HYPERLINKS, BANNER ADVERTISING OR OTHERWISE) TO THIS SITE, (VIII) ANY VIRUSES, WORMS, BUGS, TROJAN HORSES, OR THE LIKE, WHICH MAY BE TRANSMITTED TO OR FROM THIS SITE OR ANY SITES LINKED (THROUGH HYPERLINKS, BANNER ADVERTISING OR OTHERWISE) TO THIS SITE, (IX) ANY USER CONTENT OR CONTENT THAT IS DEFAMATORY, HARASSING, ABUSIVE, HARMFUL TO MINORS OR ANY PROTECTED CLASS, PORNOGRAPHIC, “X-RATED”, OBSCENE OR OTHERWISE OBJECTIONABLE, AND/OR (X) ANY LOSS OR DAMAGE OF ANY KIND INCURRED AS A RESULT OF YOUR USE OF THIS SITE OR OUR SERVICES, WHETHER BASED ON WARRANTY, CONTRACT, TORT, OR ANY OTHER LEGAL OR EQUITABLE THEORY, AND WHETHER OR NOT SPACESHIP IS ADVISED OF THE POSSIBILITY OF SUCH DAMAGES."

 

[fka1080405]

For the little it's worth, as a counter point: I have no problem with identity verification. I understand that it is important for marketplaces to be able to confidently handle transactions from third-parties. A marketplace needs confidence in the integrity of participants to then be willing to take on the liability for the transaction, on both the buyer and seller side.

I am not an expert on Spaceship's business but my understanding is that commission marketplaces take is in part covering the cost of handling transactions that go awry, i.e: in transactions where there is fraud, Spaceship will be left carrying the financial cost. The 5% commission leaves little room to be loosey-goosey, it requires a higher degree of confidence in each party and transaction.

We've seen recent examples here on NamePros of people buying and selling large quantities of domains with stolen credit cards, and examples where people are laundering money through domain name marketplaces. Verifying a person's identity doesn't guarantee they won't engage in misdeeds but it does cause the most high-risk people to self-exclude and provides the marketplace with the information required to escalate to legal action when misdeeds are committed.

Anyone who conducts business (whether in person or online) or travels internationally will have copies of their documents taken frequently[1]. If someone is uncomfortable with this practice, and doesn't want to provide their documents then they are, unfortunately, going to be limited to marketplaces that have the margins to be more loosey-goosey with their standards.

So, from my side, if identity verification is the price we pay for 5% commission, I'm happy with that. That said, if Spaceship can do away with identity verification and keep the 5% commission, great! That would be a win for everyone

[1] off the top of my head, I've had a copy of my passport taken at least 25 times so far this year, including by banks, domain registrars, consulates, hotels and even airport lounges. The times I felt most secure in providing my documents was through Veriff (and equivalent). If I refused to provide my passport to service providers, my life would grind to a halt!

 

[enetwork]

@Marina Savina @Spaceship
Hello. I just received this email:
Show attachment 284503

Show attachment 284504
I hold over 18,000 liquid 4-letter .COM domains at Spaceship, all listed in your marketplace. You earn commission on these sales, and buyers may stay with you for renewals and add-ons. The inbound traffic to these parked domains also benefits your brand both directly and indirectly.

Twice since April 2025, you have locked my entire account "for anti-fraud" unless I complete identity verification through a third-party site, magic.veriff.me. I made it clear the first time that I am not willing to upload scans of my government ID to a vendor I did not choose. (The first time it was the same nonsense. I topped up my own account using USDC, received the funds in my account, and right after that I got a block with suspicion of fraudulent activity. When I asked support to explain what exactly was fraudulent in the chain where I funded my account with my own money, I just got a generic reply, and then the block was lifted.) But this time you have completely crossed all reasonable boundaries.

What concerns me is that this verification is aimed at the wrong party. When a marketplace transaction looks risky, it makes sense to verify the buyer and their payment method - not the existing domain owner who did not initiate the payment and is using your own marketplace for transactions. This blanket lock is highly disruptive. It interferes with ongoing sales - the same sales that generate revenue for you. And I have heard many times claims like "the highest data-protection standards", "we never sell or share data", and other similar boilerplate. I have seen such statements from very large companies, only to later witness breaches or deliberate data monetization revealed.

As a matter of principle, I never give scans of my documents to anyone, and never will, except where it is absolutely unavoidable by law and strictly necessary. That is exactly what I strongly advise others to do as well. You are not a bank or law enforcement to demand such sensitive documents, and if your vendor or you were to disappear tomorrow, my personal data could end up exposed on the internet indefinitely.

To be clear: if this cannot be resolved in a privacy-respecting way (for example, as I suggested to your support team back in April after the first restriction: top up my Spaceship balance via bank transfer or card payment, where my full legal name appears clearly on the sender/payer record. That should be more than enough to confirm that the name on my account matches my identity), I will have no issue transferring these domains to another registrar and selling them on other platforms.

I am sharing this so others can understand what kind of surprises they might face with Spaceship under the current policy, in a situation where they sell their domains on Spaceship platform and, in order to receive the money, have to waste time proving something.

Just replied on this, based on your history with us this should have never happened. I went ahead and unlocked your account. I am looking further into why this happened with the team.

 

[4L.com]

For the little it's worth, as a counter point: I have no problem with identity verification. I understand that it is important for marketplaces to be able to confidently handle transactions from third-parties. A marketplace needs confidence in the integrity of participants to then be willing to take on the liability for the transaction, on both the buyer and seller side.

I am not an expert on Spaceship's business but my understanding is that commission marketplaces take is in part covering the cost of handling transactions that go awry, i.e: in transactions where there is fraud, Spaceship will be left carrying the financial cost. The 5% commission leaves little room to be loosey-goosey, it requires a higher degree of confidence in each party and transaction.

We've seen recent examples here on NamePros of people buying and selling large quantities of domains with stolen credit cards, and examples where people are laundering money through domain name marketplaces. Verifying a person's identity doesn't guarantee they won't engage in misdeeds but it does cause the most high-risk people to self-exclude and provides the marketplace with the information required to escalate to legal action when misdeeds are committed.

Anyone who conducts business (whether in person or online) or travels internationally will have copies of their documents taken frequently[1]. If someone is uncomfortable with this practice, and doesn't want to provide their documents then they are, unfortunately, going to be limited to marketplaces that have the margins to be more loosey-goosey with their standards.

So, from my side, if identity verification is the price we pay for 5% commission, I'm happy with that. That said, if Spaceship can do away with identity verification and keep the 5% commission, great! That would be a win for everyone

[1] off the top of my head, I've had a copy of my passport taken at least 25 times so far this year, including by banks, domain registrars, consulates, hotels and even airport lounges. The times I felt most secure in providing my documents was through Veriff (and equivalent). If I refused to provide my passport to service providers, my life would grind to a halt!

In my life, I have faced situations where the personal data I provided for identification - requested by supposedly very big and important organizations - later ended up leaked online, where absolutely anyone could download scans of my passport and my face, see my home address, date and place of birth, and mobile phone number. As a result, my SIM card with that phone number was reissued using this data, and there were attempts to hack my online banking, email, and social media accounts. Not to mention how many calls I’ve received from scammers who knew all my personal details and tried to steal my money under various pretexts.

Only because I used two-factor authentication everywhere possible (which, by the way, is also active on Spaceship) did it all end without any serious losses on my side. Still, I had to spend a huge amount of time reissuing all my documents.

I will never again in my life give my document scans to anyone, anywhere, unless it truly makes sense or is legally required - and I strongly advise everyone to do the same and stay away from any services that do not respect users privacy and put them at risk of fraud by collecting such data.

In this situation, there are absolutely no valid reasons to demand my document scans. They can verify my identity by phone call, video call, a bank transfer showing my name, a tax declaration if there are doubts about tax compliance or residency, a utility bill, and so on.

 

[enetwork]

This needs to be escalated asap, for Spaceship’s own good.

@enetwork

Already done and fixed. Based on obvious user history, this was a very bad decision taken by our team. Obviously our fault and no excuses.