Prompt: Does Kimi Code ban the same or no?


Response:
I'll search for information about Kimi Code's policies regarding datacenter IPs and usage restrictions.

---

Based on available information, Kimi Code does not appear to have the same aggressive datacenter IP restrictions as Claude Code. Here's how the policies differ:

Key Differences

1. Open-Source vs. Closed Architecture
Kimi K2.5 is open-weight under a modified MIT license , meaning the model can be:
- Self-hosted on your own infrastructure (including datacenters)
- Accessed through multiple third-party inference providers (NVIDIA NIMs, Synthetic.new, etc.)
- Run locally or on cloud instances without triggering "unauthorized client" blocks

Claude Code is a closed, proprietary client with strict technical safeguards against third-party harnesses spoofing its identity .

2. No Evidence of IP-Based Blocking
While Claude has extensive documented restrictions on datacenter IPs, VPNs, and geo-blocks (specifically banning China/Hong Kong/Macao) , Kimi's Terms of Service focus on activity-based prohibitions (illegal use, reverse engineering, competitive model training) rather than network origin restrictions .

The only IP-related restriction found is an optional user-configured whitelist for Kimai Cloud (a time-tracking service, not Kimi AI) —which is unrelated to Moonshot AI's policies.

3. Multiple Access Vectors Reduce Lock-in
Since Kimi is available through:
- NVIDIA NIMs: Free API access with no credit card required, automatically generated keys 
- Official Moonshot API: Standard commercial terms (0.60/M input tokens) 
- Self-hosting: Deploy on your own H100s/A100s 

There's no single "Kimi Code CLI" to spoof or abuse via datacenter scripts. Each provider handles their own abuse detection separately, and Moonshot has less incentive to block cloud IPs since they sell API access rather than flat-rate subscriptions.

4. Geographic Accessibility
Where Anthropic has completely blocked mainland China, Hong Kong, and Macau to enforce competitive restrictions , Kimi is positioned as the domestic alternative for those regions. One guide explicitly recommends migrating from Claude to "domestic models (Kimi K2, GLM-4)" when facing IP blocks .

What Kimi Does Restrict

While they don't ban datacenter IPs categorically, Kimi's ToS prohibits :
- Developing competing products/services using their API
- Reverse engineering or extracting model weights
- Circumventing usage limits or security measures
- Reselling API access without authorization

Bottom Line

Claude bans datacenter IPs to enforce its closed ecosystem, prevent API spoofing, and block competitive intelligence gathering . 

Kimi doesn't need to because its open-source nature means:
- You can legitimately run it on datacenter hardware
- Competitive users can just download the weights instead of spoofing clients
- Multiple API providers compete to offer access, decentralizing abuse prevention

If you're running automated workloads from AWS/GCP/Azure, Kimi is significantly more accessible than Claude—though you should still review your specific provider's Terms of Service (NVIDIA, Moonshot OpenPlatform, etc.) for any usage limits.