Mismatched ID Checks Risk Rejecting Real Players, Prove Executive Says

Online betting operators may be turning away legitimate customers during sign-up because separate identity-verification systems can reach conflicting conclusions about the same person, according to Caleb Sims, Head of Gaming GTM at digital identity firm Prove. Sims told Gambling Insider that when one vendor pre-fills a player’s details and another verifies their identity, the two can rely on different data sources and matching logic, sometimes producing a rejection for a customer whose information was reliable enough to populate the application seconds earlier.

The comments land as regulated operators across North America, including in Ontario, face growing pressure to verify players quickly without adding friction that drives them toward unregulated sites. Prove’s business includes partnerships with FanDuel, BetMGM and Hard Rock Bet, all major names in Canada’s largest regulated online betting market.

Where the systems disagree

Sims said context often gets lost between separate onboarding and verification tools. “A legitimate player can end up being challenged or rejected,” he said, arguing identity should function as shared infrastructure rather than a string of disconnected checks performed at each step of registration.

His preferred approach carries forward signals already established about a device or phone number rather than restarting evaluation from zero. “If I already have strong evidence that you possess the phone, that the phone has a trusted reputation and that you’re the owner of that number, I want to preserve that identity context throughout the process,” he said.

Prove cites internal onboarding metrics for its gaming clients, including up to 79 percent faster onboarding, 35 percent lower abandonment and a 90 percent match rate. The company did not publish a gaming-wide false-rejection rate, and Sims cautioned against attributing the abandonment figure to any single operator. “I wouldn’t present it as their individual result,” he said, adding that operators invest in the approach because moving legitimate players through registration with fewer unnecessary steps “has real value.”

Risk-based, not fixed, verification

Asked how operators should balance smoother sign-up against regulatory obligations, Sims said the threshold should shift with risk rather than stay fixed. “I don’t think the line is fixed. It should move with risk,” he said. A new device, phone number or SIM card could trigger extra authentication steps, he said, while a returning player on a trusted device could largely be recognized without repeated prompts.

He described the goal as “persistent identity,” maintaining confidence in a player after registration instead of repeatedly asking them to prove who they are. “Continuous verification shouldn’t mean asking someone to prove who they are over and over again,” Sims said.

AI agents on the horizon

Sims flagged deepfakes, voice cloning and AI-generated documents as tools already reshaping identity fraud, warning that automation lets attacks scale more easily. He said the longer-term challenge involves AI agents acting on a user’s behalf to sign up for accounts or initiate transactions. “It can also be, ‘Is this an agent acting for Caleb, did Caleb authorize it, and is this agent allowed to perform this particular action?'” he said, while stopping short of claiming evidence of AI agents opening gambling accounts on any meaningful scale today.

For Ontario players, the debate underscores why the AGCO requires registered operators to run identity and age checks before real-money play begins, alongside responsible-gambling tools such as deposit limits and self-exclusion once an account is active. Faster onboarding only matters if the verification behind it stays accurate.

Related: AGA’s Responsible Gaming Month Splinters as Big Sportsbooks Go Their Own Way

Related: Leaked Files Show Curaçao Licensed Stake Operator With Ownership Unresolved