Not an ethical conclusion but a pragmatic one. The ethical part is what you do after the fact:
1. Pass the cost towards self regulation of people, using client facing measures e.g. prove their innocence if they are an outlier
2. Catch a couple of cases and over market your policing ability to disadvantage the most gullible.
3. Catch a couple of cases, even minor infractions and destroy them with disproportionate fines or jail sentences, economy of randomness or economy of those who have the best lawyers.
Fraud against government, as above but add:
4. Add arbitrary constraints, you don't really want the system to work, you just fake it for political reasons
1. Pass the cost towards self regulation of people, using client facing measures e.g. prove their innocence if they are an outlier
2. Catch a couple of cases and over market your policing ability to disadvantage the most gullible.
3. Catch a couple of cases, even minor infractions and destroy them with disproportionate fines or jail sentences, economy of randomness or economy of those who have the best lawyers.
Fraud against government, as above but add:
4. Add arbitrary constraints, you don't really want the system to work, you just fake it for political reasons