Slashdot Mirror


US Government Lurked On Silk Road For Over a Year

angry tapir writes "In order to build a case against the notorious Silk Road underground marketplace, a team of U.S. law enforcement agencies spent well over a year casing the site: buying drugs, exchanging Bitcoins, visiting forums and even posing as a vendor, although they did stop short of selling any illicit goods. From March 2012 until September 2013, Federal agents closely tracked the site, making over 50 drug purchases, according to Jared DerYeghiayan, an agent with the Department of Homeland Security who was part of a special investigation unit looking into the site.

129 comments

  1. Go get em... by wbr1 · · Score: 4, Funny
    Good job boys. Stop those dopers! They would be raping your grandma and selling acid to your 5 year old if we didn't do this! Look how violently they fight over the black market we created!

    Now, kindly pay your taxes, drink a case of beast and watch the football game. Thank you!

    --
    Silence is a state of mime.
    1. Re:Go get em... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Jesus she looks like a witch.

    2. Re:Go get em... by Methadras · · Score: 1

      Rule #1 of government: It hates competition.

  2. Who dat on Silk Road by dotslashdot · · Score: 5, Funny

    Turns out, the government was just buying and selling to itself the whole time and no one else is actually on Silk Road!

    1. Re: Who dat on Silk Road by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      LOL

    2. Re:Who dat on Silk Road by JonathanR · · Score: 1

      It wouldn't be surprising. There's suggestion that LEO/regulatory crawl-bots make up a lot (possibly most) of child-porn TOR traffic.

    3. Re:Who dat on Silk Road by meta-monkey · · Score: 1

      So what you're saying is the 4chan Party Van isn't really coming to my house?!

      --
      We don't have a state-run media we have a media-run state.
  3. Ross Ulbricht case? If so, ... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    would that all come to light in the case against Ross Ulbricht? Per the Arstechnica article, the defense being mounted is slightly eye-raising. I wondering, if the Government did have that much time and data on Silk Road, and dox, yet don't use it in the case against him, then perhaps Ulbricht isn't the DRP (Dead Pirate Roberts), and he just might be who he says he is: a convenient scape-goat.

    1. Re:Ross Ulbricht case? If so, ... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      There's a difference between proving silk road was doing dodgy stuff and proving Ulbricbht was the one running it.

    2. Re:Ross Ulbricht case? If so, ... by rot26 · · Score: 1

      Yet with only a little sleight of hand, the jurors won't know the difference. The chance of DPR (dread or dead) being found innocent are zero.

      --



      To ensure perfect aim, shoot first and call whatever you hit the target
  4. Bitcoins - Good Enough for Government Work! by Canth7 · · Score: 2

    Who says Bitcoins aren't legit payment services? They work just fine for the US gov't to buy drugs, to seize and then eventually sell back to the public. http://www.coindesk.com/us-mar...

    1. Re:Bitcoins - Good Enough for Government Work! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      The US government holds that Bitcoin is property not legal tender. They work just fine for the the US government to buy drugs during a sting operation, because drug dealers accept it as payment. Acting like you belong is kinda the point of undercover work. Do you expect the agents to say, "hey, bro, I'd pay with Bitcoin like you asked but Imma government spook and gots ta pay with cash money, yo!" You're purposefully conflating undercover work with official business to make some point that only tinfoil-hatters will care about.

    2. Re:Bitcoins - Good Enough for Government Work! by Canth7 · · Score: 2

      Parts of the US government hold that Bitcoin is property, namely the IRS. However, the government certainly counts it as money with regard to money laundering - just ask Charlie Shrem. Agreed that the undercover purchases aren't really official business, however, this is definitely official business: http://www.usmarshals.gov/asse... I don't imagine that the US Marshals are going to sell Bitcoin one day and then on another day have a different branch of the US government say that Bitcoin isn't a valid means of transferring value, legal tender be damned.

    3. Re:Bitcoins - Good Enough for Government Work! by jrumney · · Score: 4, Informative

      The US government holds that Bitcoin is property not legal tender.

      Legal tender has a very specific and limited meaning relating to payment of debts - if you owe a debt, then an offer of legal tender to settle it cannot be refused. Not being legal tender is not a barrier to something being used in commerce, even by the government. If both parties agree, they can use whatever payment system they want (as long as the IRS is kept happy by declaring a US$ equivalent where required).

    4. Re:Bitcoins - Good Enough for Government Work! by ihtoit · · Score: 1

      oil for food. Et cetera.

      --
      Political debates have me rolling my eyes so much I think I got optical whiplash. I should sue. - Foamy The Squirrel
    5. Re: Bitcoins - Good Enough for Government Work! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Can't be refused? Tell that to the "we don't accept cash" businesses out there...

    6. Re: Bitcoins - Good Enough for Government Work! by ihtoit · · Score: 1

      oh, you mean the ones that don't get my business?

      --
      Political debates have me rolling my eyes so much I think I got optical whiplash. I should sue. - Foamy The Squirrel
    7. Re:Bitcoins - Good Enough for Government Work! by Shakrai · · Score: 3, Interesting

      Parts of the US government hold that Bitcoin is property, namely the IRS. However, the government certainly counts it as money with regard to money laundering - just ask Charlie Shrem.

      Laundering can be done with any tangible asset, from cash to diamonds to Bitcoin. That's hardly news and doesn't suggest the Government considers Bitcoin to be a currency. Bitcoin can be considered a currency when it's legal tender for all debts, public and private. Until then it's merely an asset. The fact that some people are willing to trade it for goods and services does not make it a currency. You could exchange everything from beer to securities for goods and services. Maybe I'll start charging people shares of GOOG for my labors....

      --
      I want peace on earth and goodwill toward man.
      We are the United States Government! We don't do that sort of thing.
    8. Re: Bitcoins - Good Enough for Government Work! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Informative

      If Bob's No-Cash-Allowed Hot Dog Stand doesn't present a bill to you until you finished eating the hot dog, then Bob has to accept cash as payment for your debt. However, if Bob makes you pay in full when you place the order, as most hot dog stands do, there is no debt to settle and he has the right to refuse business with anyone who doesn't have a credit card.

    9. Re: Bitcoins - Good Enough for Government Work! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      If they let you get stuff so you are in debt to them they will have to accept legal tender.

    10. Re: Bitcoins - Good Enough for Government Work! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Diamonds and gold are not legal tender either. They all can be part of money laundering. They point is you start with dirty cash and finish with clean. The detergent is not important.

    11. Re: Bitcoins - Good Enough for Government Work! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      In the case of gold I don't know if it can (legally) be used as any form of payment. I remember an episode of Pawn Stars when an individual wanted to sell something (a car I believe) and receive gold as payment. Rick stated that he couldn't do that but he would sell the individual the requisite amount of gold after the transaction. When all was said and done Rick handed him a stack of cash, then he immediately handed it back in exchange for a stack of gold.

    12. Re: Bitcoins - Good Enough for Government Work! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      "Debt" is the key word here, if nothing has changed hands there is no debt. An example would be if you were in a store and brought an item up to checkout and were refused based on your payment method. You can simply hand back your item and walk out of the store, no debt has been incurred. On the other hand if you went to a restaurant and had a meal, when the bill was brought to you at the end of that meal they cannot legally deny a cash payment because a debt has been incurred.

  5. Slashdot messing up their UI? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Informative

    Has someone been tweaking the Slashdot CSS? Because you've gone and fucked things up.

    The Newer/Older buttons on the front page shrank, so the background style doesn't cover all of the text. Also, the search bar in the header (site-wide) shrunk in height and is too small to display the text typed into it. In the screenshot I have "search term here" entered into the input. Screenshot 1

    There's a huge empty white block on the left side of each article page now. Screenshot 2

    The post/reply comment page now has a semi-visible "Archived Discussion" button, on every article, even brand new ones. Screenshot 3

    All in Firefox 34, Windows 7.

    1. Re: Slashdot messing up their UI? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      More of this! Mod parent up! +1

    2. Re:Slashdot messing up their UI? by BarbaraHudson · · Score: 2, Interesting

      You forgot that the massage list is also now fixed-maximum-width, glued to the left side, which looks stupid on larger monitors

      --
      "Transparent" is a shit show that trades on every stereotype going. A man in drag is NOT a transsexual.
    3. Re:Slashdot messing up their UI? by pitchpipe · · Score: 5, Insightful
      They're probably trying to fuck up the classic site so they have an excuse to roll out beta to fix it. It's definitely not displaying properly on my phone anymore.

      If it becomes beta only, I'll become soylentnews.org only.

      --
      Look where all this talking got us, baby.
    4. Re:Slashdot messing up their UI? by The+Fifth+Man · · Score: 4, Informative

      They'll follow this course of action now -- subtle stuff.

      Back in 2006 they ran a CSS redesign contest. Slashdot users overwhelmingly preferred Peter Lada's redesign:
      http://web.archive.org/web/201...

      They picked a mobile-ready, stripped down design that left a lot to be desired. Then the beta fiasco with the Dice purchase ("fuck you, get ready to have this shoved down your throat for the sake of pointless redesign" ).

      To avoid a hue and cry, they'll be making unannounced changes like this. Why? Because fuck the slashdot community, that's why.

    5. Re:Slashdot messing up their UI? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      You forgot that the massage list is also now fixed-maximum-width, glued to the left side, which looks stupid on larger monitors

      Have you seen how shitty it looks on a mobile device? Firefox or Chrome on android, neither have pinch-to-zoom, and the sad thing is that's more the browser manufacturers' fault than Slashdot's.

    6. Re:Slashdot messing up their UI? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Piss off troll.

    7. Re:Slashdot messing up their UI? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Has someone been tweaking the Slashdot CSS? Because you've gone and fucked things up.

      I believe the saying is, "You can't have a crapshoot without Dice."

    8. Re:Slashdot messing up their UI? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Go away APK.

    9. Re:Slashdot messing up their UI? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Apk wouldn't post that to BarbaraHudson. Apk'd post this instead http://slashdot.org/comments.p...

    10. Re:Slashdot messing up their UI? by AmiMoJo · · Score: 1

      The un-anti-aliased text, it burns! :-)

      The reply page seems to have shrunk by about 50% horizontally too for some reason. Now half the screen of my widescreen monitor is just an empty space.

      --
      const int one = 65536; (Silvermoon, Texture.cs)
      SJW, n: "Someone I don't like, and by the way I'm a fuckwit" - AC
    11. Re:Slashdot messing up their UI? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Woo hoo, they fixed it! Or reverted it. In any event it's working again for now.

    12. Re:Slashdot messing up their UI? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Wouldn't that be aliased text?

    13. Re:Slashdot messing up their UI? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      huh? Chrome on Android has pinch to zoom, and always had as far as I can remember.

      I suspect you may be a Silk Road infiltrator

  6. "... did stop short of selling any illicit goods." by Narcocide · · Score: 0

    DID they? DID they really? And NONE of their employees happened to do it on the side "unofficially?" I'd love to see THAT part proven in a court of law.

  7. its a drug bust by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 3, Insightful

    For everyone who is about to object: what do you think a drug bust looks like? They posed as drugs consumers/dealers and busted the parties buying/selling. This seems like what my taxpayer dollars should go towards: stomping out illegal activity where it is prevalent.

    1. Re:its a drug bust by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      at what point do you change what illegal is? one would say it's extremely difficult with the prison system lobbying for more illegal activities.

    2. Re:its a drug bust by pitchpipe · · Score: 4, Insightful

      For everyone who is about to object: what do you think a drug bust looks like? They posed as drugs consumers/dealers and busted the parties buying/selling. This seems like what my taxpayer dollars should go towards: stomping out illegal activity where it is prevalent.

      Not only is it a complete waste of time and ruins people's lives, it is a fucking waste of my tax dollars. Oh, but they sure are about to win this stupid fucking drug war.

      Next you think they'll try to outlaw stupidity, thereby breaking logic once and for all.

      --
      Look where all this talking got us, baby.
    3. Re:its a drug bust by ArsonSmith · · Score: 5, Insightful

      I know some people probably can't handle it, but the only lives I know that have been ruined have been due to the police action against them and nothing to do with the pot smoking they did.

      --
      Paying taxes to buy civilization is like paying a hooker to buy love.
    4. Re:its a drug bust by BarbaraHudson · · Score: 1

      Not only is it a complete waste of time and ruins people's lives

      Because crack and illegal abuse of prescription drugs also ruin people's lives.

      --
      "Transparent" is a shit show that trades on every stereotype going. A man in drag is NOT a transsexual.
    5. Re:its a drug bust by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      stomping out illegal activity where it is prevalent within their jurisdictional boundaries.

      FTFY

    6. Re:its a drug bust by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      You mean people that were too stupid to either just follow the law or keep the activity hidden? Yeah, that's a fucking shame, how exactly is that the government's fault? You don't have the right to snort random things because you want to, and certainly not expect everybody else to pick up the tab because you're so fucking pathetic that you need drugs to forget about it.

    7. Re:its a drug bust by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      You do have the right. The government just violates it.

    8. Re:its a drug bust by tsotha · · Score: 1

      Meh. At this time illegal drugs are, well, illegal. The executive branch is not and should not be in the business of deciding which laws are stupid and which aren't. That's for Congress to decide. As long as what the Silk Road people were doing was illegal, the feds have a responsibility to arrest and prosecute them.

    9. Re:its a drug bust by whoever57 · · Score: 1

      Because crack and illegal abuse of prescription drugs also ruin people's lives.

      Yes, but whose lives are ruined? The lives of the people who choose to take such drugs.

      Plenty of people's lives are runing by gambling and alcohol, yet we know that banning these vices leads to worse problems than regulating them.

      --
      The real "Libtards" are the Libertarians!
    10. Re:its a drug bust by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      ... where it is prevalent.

      Yeah, rare offenses like the NSA head-honcho lying to congress 3 times don't count. Those 30 (?) Goldman-Sachs employees who repeatedly falsified the value of the CDOs they insured before defaults occurred, aren't important. Let's go after the the thousands of college kids and soccer mums for staying home and relaxing via some marijuana. The USA tried that with alcohol and eventually admitted defeat. After some 80 years of illegality, US states are de-criminalizing marijuana consumption.

      Many countries have a quality of life higher than the USA because they're not driven by a "it's your fault", war-mongering ideology. Other countries spend their money on restricting drug use, not putting as many people as they can in prison. The American 'zero-tolerance' results in the back-yard growers in prison, creating a monopoly for the last dealer standing. The resulting, very rich mafia can afford faster delivery cars and smarter lawyers which the police can't catch. Instead the US police steal everything from drug-dealers and avoid the criminal court entirely. After 20 years of chasing rich criminals, the police realize it's more profitable to label ordinary people as drug dealers and steal from them.

    11. Re: its a drug bust by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Except that the executive branch does exactly that all the time. When was the last serious anti monopoly action in the US? Reagan was president. The last time banksters went to jail in large numbers for systemic fraud? It was while the first George Bush was in office. You seriously think there's none of that sort of stuff been going on in this country since Clinton, the second Bush, and Obama have been in office? Give me a break.

      They choose what laws to enforce all the damned time, so grow up and face reality--and learn more about how the world works than what they teach in high school civics classes.

    12. Re:its a drug bust by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Piss off troll. Seriously, go away.

    13. Re:its a drug bust by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      Well, not many people are close acquaintances of the meth and crack heads on the street. At least, not after they become like that. For weed you at least have some low key folks who aren't so bad.

      It's not like you have to look hard to find drug addicts who are out committing crimes because they can't hold a job and have no money.

    14. Re:its a drug bust by Richard_at_work · · Score: 1, Troll

      Heh, laughable - they were caught doing something illegal and that ruined their lives, but its somehow the polices fault that being caught ruined their lives.

    15. Re:its a drug bust by sociocapitalist · · Score: 1

      For everyone who is about to object: what do you think a drug bust looks like? They posed as drugs consumers/dealers and busted the parties buying/selling. This seems like what my taxpayer dollars should go towards: stomping out illegal activity where it is prevalent.

      Surely catching big white collar crime and corrupt politicians should be prioritized over small quantity drug issues.

      But of course stomping out truly significant criminal activity is beyond the scope or capabilities of the LEOs that work for those same corrupt politicians, who in turn are owned by those big white collar criminals.

      --
      blindly antisocialist = antisocial
    16. Re: its a drug bust by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Your case that they are doing a bad job in other areas is accepted. Your case that they should not be doing another job is not accepted.

    17. Re:its a drug bust by meta-monkey · · Score: 1

      Also, their methods (as far as this goes...the method by which they exposed the server's location is still shrouded in mystery) are fine. People are just butt-hurt about the crime they're investigating.

      I think drugs should be legal (and regulated). But until they are...this is just good police work. You want the cops to stop doing this? Change the drug laws.

      --
      We don't have a state-run media we have a media-run state.
    18. Re:its a drug bust by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      caught doing something illegal and that ruined their lives

      That's the issue. If no one is hurt, why is it illegal and why should a victimless crime result in a ruined life?

    19. Re:its a drug bust by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Tell that to the twit who's out there *rewarding* the criminal immigrants.

      Yes, our system is broken. In no small part because bad behavior has been rewarded in the past. A lesson the current administration seems to have failed to learn.

    20. Re:its a drug bust by BarbaraHudson · · Score: 1

      Yes, but whose lives are ruined? The lives of the people who choose to take such drugs.

      My guess is you haven't had to deal with a family member who is permanently paralyzed on one side from several strokes during heart surgery which was needed after decades of doing crack and abusing prescription drugs, who will never get better and will die a premature death.

      linky

      How does cocaine affect the heart?

      Cocaine use kills over 15,000 people each year in the United States due to overuse or related accidents. Additionally, cocaine use can cause damage to the heart, which leads to many more deaths each year. Several cardiovascular complications are closely related to cocaine use. They include chest pain syndromes, heart attacks, heart failure, strokes, aortic dissection, and fatal and nonfatal arrhythmias.

      Others include:
      myocarditis (inflammation of the heart muscle)
      endocarditis (inflammation of the inner lining of the heart)
      pulmonary edema (fluid in the lungs)
      vascular thrombosis (blood clots in blood vessels)
      dilated cardiomyopathy (an enlarged heart)

      Some of these potentially fatal complications can occur in a first-time user. Older people with abnormal coronary arteries and diseased blood vessels in the brain are at even greater risk.

      Today law enforcement agencies and the medical community recognize cocaine as one of the most dangerous illicit drugs in common use. Because it's increasingly popular and easily bought, the number of cocaine-related cardiovascular disabilities and deaths may be expected to rise. Furthermore, smoking crack cocaine, which is cheaper, more potent and widely available, will lead to even more strokes and heart attacks in younger people not normally "at risk."

      It's going to cost taxpayers at least $70k a year (on top of the 6-figure sum already spent last year for quintuple bypass, physiotherapy to try to restore function, etc) because she needs 24/7 care in an institutional setting and frequent doctor's visits, so it affects everyone. And that's not factoring the impact on family and friends.

      --
      "Transparent" is a shit show that trades on every stereotype going. A man in drag is NOT a transsexual.
    21. Re:its a drug bust by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      If you have to facilitate any part of the crime, in order to stop it, then you are doing it wrong. In all cases like this, it is wrong to assume that any deal would have happened otherwise. For example, if you pick hooker #2 based solely on her looks, and it turns out she's an undercover cop, you'd not have committed the crime if she was not working a sting. The same goes for drugs, terror plots, etc. It's all bullshit.

    22. Re:its a drug bust by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Your family member proves his point. She did it to herself taking cocaine and causing her apparent paralysis.

    23. Re:its a drug bust by BarbaraHudson · · Score: 1

      Except that the damage is not just limited to her, which is what the poster contended - everyone pays.

      --
      "Transparent" is a shit show that trades on every stereotype going. A man in drag is NOT a transsexual.
    24. Re:its a drug bust by david_thornley · · Score: 1

      Sure. I know some people whose lives were seriously harmed because a loved one was an alcoholic, also (to be clear, I'm talking about more than one alcoholic also). Thousands of people each year die in the US because of drunk driving. Alcohol is still legal. Tobacco kills a whole lot of people and is still legal. From what I've read about pot (which is doubtless biased and unreliable) it's not as bad as alcohol (but might be as bad as tobacco).

      --
      "When you have eliminated the unacceptable, whatever is left, however improbable, must be the truthiness" - Holmes
    25. Re:its a drug bust by david_thornley · · Score: 1

      What I don't understand is what Congress should have to do with illegal drugs. Banning alcohol took a Constitutional amendment. Making marijuana a Schedule I drug, considered more harmful than morphine, was a Congressional act.

      --
      "When you have eliminated the unacceptable, whatever is left, however improbable, must be the truthiness" - Holmes
    26. Re:its a drug bust by whoever57 · · Score: 1

      Let me first express my sympathy for your personal tragedy.
      And now respond:
      1. The drugs taken were already illegal. Your personal experience shows that the laws against such drugs don't work.
      2. You ignored my point that we have historical data that banning personal vices leads to more hardship, not less.

      --
      The real "Libtards" are the Libertarians!
    27. Re:its a drug bust by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      They're families and kids can be ruined as well. The person they hit while driving under the influence...the company that lost work because the user was incompentent... the hospital that foots the bill for an OD after they lost their job and life insurance....

    28. Re:its a drug bust by tsotha · · Score: 1

      That's a whole 'nother issue, one on which I agree with you. Sadly, the supreme court came down on the wrong side in Wickard, so things are the way they are.

    29. Re:its a drug bust by BarbaraHudson · · Score: 1

      That doesn't change the facts. We don't need yet another way for people to ruin both their lives and the lives of those around them, and cost up to a million or more in taxpayers money before they "shuck their mortal coil."

      Your argument is as persuasive as the speeder who says he shouldn't be ticketed because other speeders were going even faster.

      --
      "Transparent" is a shit show that trades on every stereotype going. A man in drag is NOT a transsexual.
    30. Re:its a drug bust by ArsonSmith · · Score: 1

      Never said it was the polices fault. It's the fault of the Laws and the punishment that doesn't fit a victim-less dogmatic crime.

      --
      Paying taxes to buy civilization is like paying a hooker to buy love.
  8. Re:"... did stop short of selling any illicit good by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    How do you prove a negative? Why would you assume they did?

  9. Re:"... did stop short of selling any illicit good by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    If it was done "on the side" then it was done by a person outside of their official capacity working on the project. Employers aren't held responsible for what their employee does off the clock. Besides that, how would it be proven in a court of law? You'd have to charge a specific person or all of them. Here, let me write your stupid warrantless arrest affidavit.

    Your affiant read and article on Slashdot which stated certain members of the US government bought illicit items on the Silk Road website but that they stopped short of selling items. Your affiant has no proof that this is not true other than your affiant personally believes that this is not true and that your affiant wants this personally-held fact PROVEN in a court of law. Therefore, your affiant would like all persons associated with this project arrested immediately and placed on trial for some charge your affiant doesn't know, yet.

    The victim is described as the common sense of every conspiracy theorist in America.

    Sworn to and affirmed before me on 01/14/15

    Santa Claus

  10. the thing i never understood was by circletimessquare · · Score: 1

    why did people ever trust tor?

    tor was built by the us navy for dissidents and spies. this is no deep secret

    and the slightest strategic thought makes one understand it should be possible for an entity like the us govt to control or track enough exit nodes to mostly have a handle on most tor traffic

    how would anyone with a basic understanding of networking not see?

    now people are building their own tor-like services. ok, i see the innate untraceability therein (until govts make a concerted sustained effort to profile, then shape traffic, so it will be safe only for awhile)

    but was it just a bunch of ignorant enthusiasm that saw tor as "dark" and somehow protected from govt visibility?

    --
    intellectual property law is philosophically incoherent. it is your moral duty to ignore it or sabotage it
    1. Re:the thing i never understood was by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0, Funny

      The thing i never understood was

      how your post didn't end with

      Burma shave

    2. Re:the thing i never understood was by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      actually it's still difficult to track tor users. hidden services provide obfuscution, but doesn't promise total anonymity. anyone who told you otherwise was sold snake oil, in fact this is mentioned on the project homepage.

      but keep bashing the government, it's fun to watch.

    3. Re:the thing i never understood was by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      The thing i never understood was

      how your post didn't end with

      Burma shave

      What exactly is a burma shave anyway? Is that anything like a brazilian wax? Really want to know cuz it's often repeated but never defined.

    4. Re:the thing i never understood was by ArsonSmith · · Score: 0

      So in all your big spiel, you either think that the government is still covering up their "exploit" of tor, or you are just spreading FUD.

      Tor was taken down do to a social slip and not anything technical.

      --
      Paying taxes to buy civilization is like paying a hooker to buy love.
    5. Re:the thing i never understood was by BarbaraHudson · · Score: 1

      The thing i never understood was

      how your post didn't end with

      Burma shave

      What exactly is a burma shave anyway? Is that anything like a brazilian wax? Really want to know cuz it's often repeated but never defined.

      It's an old Troll Tuesday tradition. It's a long story.

      --
      "Transparent" is a shit show that trades on every stereotype going. A man in drag is NOT a transsexual.
    6. Re:the thing i never understood was by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 3, Interesting

      So in all your big spiel, you either think that the government is still covering up their "exploit" of tor, or you are just spreading FUD.

      Tor was taken down do to a social slip and not anything technical.

      The TOr project openly acknowledges they are vulnerable to timing attacks by an entity that an view all of the network or at least a large segment of it. The US government is definitely such a entity. That isnt even remotely controversial. Thats probably why the Tor project itself warns you not to depend on Tor if you truly need strong anonymity.

      Why would they need an "exploit" when they easily have the resources to take advantage of a fundamental weakness in the Tor design? Methinks your "anti-tinfoil-hattery" is far in excess of your actual technical knowledge of what you're talking about. It definitely wouldn't be the first time a Slashdotter "argues" from emotion and is easily refuted.

    7. Re:the thing i never understood was by AHuxley · · Score: 1

      The other question is a Tails https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/... or Whonix (Tor anonymity network, Debian GNU/Linux and security by isolation) https://www.whonix.org/
      That would in theory contain any more direct ip requests sent from any site or network.
      Re "how would anyone with a basic understanding of networking not see?"
      funded by the US government (16, 2014)
      http://pando.com/2014/07/16/to...
      The parallel construction that still seems to hold up is the sending of a page or code to show the real ip that always seems to leak out.

      --
      Domestic spying is now "Benign Information Gathering"
    8. Re:the thing i never understood was by scottbomb · · Score: 1

      I read in a Tor forum that it was Silkroad that was taken down (not Tor) and it was indeed due to a social slip, the owner logging in to IRC WITHOUT the protection of Tor, that caused him to get busted.

      True, hard drugs and kiddie porn are to be dealt with. Fine. Go get 'em Barney Fife!

      But what troubles me is that with all the advances in computer science, it's still impossible to create a truly brick-wall secure network where people can be truly anonymous. Is it even possible? It seems so, at least theoretically. Forget AI or self-driving cars. Baby steps. Let's solve some of these problems first.

    9. Re:the thing i never understood was by ihtoit · · Score: 1

      it's an old brushless shaving cream from the States, they had some whacky idea that roadside advertising (a distant ancestor of the IED) would distract drivers frm their primary purpose which is to KEEP YOUR EYES ON THE FUCKING ROAD and leave them with a hankering to spread non-foaming spoo on their faces before blade grooming.

      --
      Political debates have me rolling my eyes so much I think I got optical whiplash. I should sue. - Foamy The Squirrel
    10. Re: the thing i never understood was by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I actually shave with a straight razor and mug soap. Have for over a decade. Burma shave was good shit. Have you ever used it or did you just want to sound clever?

    11. Re: the thing i never understood was by ihtoit · · Score: 1

      I use a Philips Nivea Coolskin and did it work?

      --
      Political debates have me rolling my eyes so much I think I got optical whiplash. I should sue. - Foamy The Squirrel
    12. Re:the thing i never understood was by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Computers were made to copy data. To create the service you want, you have to trust that a computer you're using or routing through is not copying the data of your presence. There's almost zero way to be guaranteed that it's not. You can encrypt your data, and maybe you have a fighting chance, but there has to be a record of where your data is going to and coming from. And you have to trust that whomever is doing that routing is not logging and colluding with other people along the way.

      Ultimately, the only way to make a truly brick-wall secure network is to own all the nodes along your path. Like the old story goes, "Three people may keep a secret, if two of them are dead."

  11. Your Tax Dollars At Work by hyades1 · · Score: 4, Interesting

    So how many millions of dollars did this "team of U.S. law enforcement agencies" spend in a whole year of fattening themselves up at the taxpayer's expense?

    And what did they accomplish? They knocked Silk Road off the net for a few months, and in so doing helped it improve its security for next time. Now it's up and running again, making scads of money for the operators, and thumbing its nose at the U.S.

    Oh, well, at least long-suffering taxpayers can happily contemplate about all the boats, cottages and retirement homes they've bought for Norbert the Nark and his Homeland Security buddies.

    --
    I've calculated my velocity with such exquisite precision that I have no idea where I am.
    1. Re:Your Tax Dollars At Work by vux984 · · Score: 2, Insightful

      And what did they accomplish? They knocked Silk Road off the net for a few months, and in so doing helped it improve its security for next time.

      What is your point?

      Are you suggesting we just ignore the black market?

      That we should simply pretend it doesn't exist, until its so mainstream that even the local coffeeshop will let you pay for your espresso and avoid paying taxes?

      You do have a supportable case that drugs shouldn't be a black market product in the first place. But that's hardly a justification to make the argument that the police shouldn't be tasked with shutting down black markets.

      What about murder for hire? Money laundering? Child porn? Slave trafficking? ...

    2. Re:Your Tax Dollars At Work by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Insightful

      What about murder for hire? Money laundering? Child porn? Slave trafficking? ...

      Unlike recreational drug use, those things cannot be done responsibily and they always have victims. That's why they should remain illegal, because they do demonstrable material harm to real people, not merely because they're frowned upon by busybodies, nanny states, private prison industries, and other control freaks whose fevered egos require them to try (and fail) to dictate how other people will live.

      I seriously and rightly question the intellectual honesty of anyone who would deliberately conflate such things. A willful effort to misrepresent one issue by grouping it with much worse issues can be the only motive there. This is, in fact, a good example characterizing the pro-drug-prohibition rhetoric that has expanded the police state and caused over 60% of all prisoners to be there because of nonviolent drug offenses at tremendous monetary and social cost to us all.

    3. Re:Your Tax Dollars At Work by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      What about murder for hire? Money laundering? Child porn? Slave trafficking? ...

      Well, if they took that shit seriously, the cops would be busting too many of their own. You gotta tread very lightly there. The whole government could fall like the towers if the truth were known. But, chances are, most people won't care and not much would come of it.

    4. Re:Your Tax Dollars At Work by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Interesting

      Money laundering shouldn't be illegal because of the 4th Amendment/5th Amendments.

      It's only due to presumed guilt that such an absurd concept even exists. It's partially drug dealers fault for dealing in cash instead of gold. If drug dealers only accepted gold coins as payment, the US Government would have a hard time going after them for money laundering.

      Murder for hire gets blurry around assassination markets vs Life Insurance.

      Nobody is arguing that shutting down child porn and slavery is bad. They are great examples of better uses for tax dollars than harassing the retailers/consumers of the few naturopathic medications which actually work. If Weed, Coke, Opium, Peyote, and Mushrooms were legal, very few people would consume Meth, Crack, Heroin, Methadone, PCP, or LSD.

      Amphetamine salts/Provigil should be available with prescription, but that prescription should be "shall issue" unless a compelling reason can be demonstrated by the prescribing physician that the danger to the patient is immediate and compelling. The pill bottles should come with big nasty bold text like on cigarettes:
      "Sleep is the only medically recommended treatment for fatigue. Use of this substance is known to be bad for your health. Extended periods of sustained use are dangerous and will have permanent and lasting negative health consequences including cardiac disease, dementia, or even death.

      Please consult a sleep therapist or make the necessary lifestyle changes if insomnia or schedule problems are requiring use of these substances on a regular basis. Contact the Labor Board for assistance if your employer is not making the necessary accommodations to allow adequate sleep."

      I have a small hand-full of mental illnesses but sleep problems are the worst. Sustained treatment for depression/CFS with Amphetamines/stimulants has given me some pretty good insight in to the merits of those medications. I think anyone should be allowed to have them for any reason. They're better for you than cigarettes, which is the socially accepted stimulant of choice for stressful occupations. People literally kill themselves for their jobs. I'm still physically recovering from my last extended period of overtime. High-stress occupations are just workaholics with a lack of professionalism required to pace themselves at a sustainable level.

      Despite the fact that speed/stimulants are a band-aid to poor decision making: having a large portion of society sucking down energy drinks and no doze because it's somehow more socially acceptable to do heart damage with caffeine than speed/cocaine is fucking stupid. I've been stimulant free for nearly 3 months now. I'm much happier and in better health without them(but I get much less done). Oh well: It's not worth it and the productivity gains are short lived. Borrowing against the future, even with CFS.

      I've never done coke, but despite it being a terrible-samaritan of a drug: it's less damaging to society than banning it and having to deal with Meth/Crack as a consequence. Ditto in regards to opium vs heroin/methadone. I'm not even touching on the reduction in abuse of prescription pain killers.

      I don't have any comment on benzo's. I don't like them or understand their appeal.

      Muscle relaxers are pleasant and should probably be available just like Amphetamines/Provigil.

      Short version:
      Legalize Weed, Coke, Mushrooms, & Opium and leave Crack/Heroin/Meth illegal. Society will immediately benefit with true addicts getting the help they need after a complete collapse in consumer demand for the majority of the smuggling/black market problem.

    5. Re:Your Tax Dollars At Work by scottbomb · · Score: 1

      Thus is the "war on drugs". Same old story, just new actors. It always amazes me how the US government THOUGHT it learned its lesson that with alcohol that prohibition doesn't work. But no, they just prohibited other substances and ended up with the same problems (organized crime).

    6. Re:Your Tax Dollars At Work by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      with a response like that I seriously doubt you are an adult, would be stunned if you are even older than 20. Your response shows the type of extreme immaturity that only comes from the very young. i.e. if you don't agree with me then fuck off because your opinion doesn't matter.

    7. Re:Your Tax Dollars At Work by Gavagai80 · · Score: 1

      The problem with keeping drugs illegal is that there are so many customers who want to buy drugs that you end up with a huge thriving black market in which the murderers, child porn, slavers etc can easily hide. It's a lot harder to catch the dangerous part of the black market when a large fraction of the country is using the black market for non-dangerous things.

      --
      This space intentionally left blank
    8. Re:Your Tax Dollars At Work by meta-monkey · · Score: 1

      There's nothing dishonest about conflating the enforcement of drug laws vis-a-vis the enforcement of laws against violent crime.

      Illicit drug trade and murder-for-hire have something in common: they're both illegal. And it's the job of the cops to investigate and arrest people who engage in those activities. The last thing I want is cops deciding which laws they are and are not going to enforce. Who they will and will not bust.* That's not a nation of laws. That's a nation of men. No thank you.

      If you want the cops to stop arresting people for drug crimes, change the law. I'm for that! Legalize it I say! I'll vote right with you! In the meantime, cops are just doing what the people mandated they do. And that's exactly what we want, because when somebody breaks the law in a way that negatively impacts you, the last thing you want is the cops saying "meh, we choose not to enforce that law. Suck it." Good for the goose. "But but but...I voted for that law! I demand you enforce it!" If only we had a nation of laws...

      * Yes, I know the executive branch already prioritizes which laws to target for enforcement. That's a failure of the system, of there being too many laws to enforce, not an excuse to ignore the laws that exist. And yes, we want cops to use discretion in their police work. Maybe don't haul some college kid off to jail and make him lose his scholarship over a joint. But there's a big difference between "giving somebody a break" and "willfully refusing to shut down a massive black market."

      --
      We don't have a state-run media we have a media-run state.
    9. Re:Your Tax Dollars At Work by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I think you are assuming that Silk Road only sold drugs, when in fact it sold all of the things GP mentioned.

    10. Re:Your Tax Dollars At Work by hyades1 · · Score: 1

      You proved your opinion is worthless, and you know exactly how. So I'll repeat myself: fuck off. You're a shill, probably paid by some government enforcement agency one way or another.

      --
      I've calculated my velocity with such exquisite precision that I have no idea where I am.
    11. Re:Your Tax Dollars At Work by hyades1 · · Score: 1

      Thanks for an interesting perspective on this.

      --
      I've calculated my velocity with such exquisite precision that I have no idea where I am.
    12. Re:Your Tax Dollars At Work by vux984 · · Score: 1

      Unlike recreational drug use, those things cannot be done responsibily and they always have victims.

      Ok.

      I seriously and rightly question the intellectual honesty of anyone who would deliberately conflate such things.

      I didn't conflate anything.

      The silk road is a black market for ALL of those things. It is therefore the police's job to shut down the MARKET itself; which is what they (albeit briefly did).

      And the further and deeper underground it goes the better. One will never eliminate a black market entirely, but its absurd to suggest that the police simply ignore it outright.

      This is, in fact, a good example characterizing the pro-drug-prohibition rhetoric that has expanded the police state and caused over 60% of all prisoners to be there because of nonviolent drug offenses at tremendous monetary and social cost to us all.

      And I even said in my post that I agree that it is supportable that drugs should not be illegal. Legalizing drugs isn't going to make the silk road go away though; because there is always somehting illegal to buy and sell. And I support the police seeking to destroy the silk road. (or at least drive it as far underground as possible.)

      I think you misread my post, because your accusation of intellectual dishonesty really doesn't fit at all here.

    13. Re:Your Tax Dollars At Work by vux984 · · Score: 1

      I am not arguing that drugs -should- be illegal. Frankly, as I said in my post, I agree they largely should not be illegal.

      The silk road however isn't going to disappear with the legalization of more recreational drugs.

    14. Re:Your Tax Dollars At Work by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Wow, did mommy make you get up early this morning to drive you to school? You seem a bit cranky.

    15. Re:Your Tax Dollars At Work by Gavagai80 · · Score: 1

      The number of people involved with silk road and thus the overall viability and impact of silk road would be severely damaged without the recreational drug market.

      --
      This space intentionally left blank
  12. Drugs by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    "An 1/8th of an ounce ought to be enough for anybody" - Bill Gates

    1. Re:Drugs by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      What's that in the metric system? 640 kilos?

  13. No Surprise by mbone · · Score: 0

    Anyone who is surprised by this is an idiot.

    1. Re:No Surprise by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Seconded. Everyone who uses sites like this knows that the feds can get in as easily as they can. Buyers are protected by only purchasing from sellers with good reputations, and sellers are protected by using fake return addresses.

  14. Over 50 drug purchases. by meerling · · Score: 1

    Really? So were they gathering evidence, or getting ready for a big agency party?
    Last I've heard, they can arrest and charge with a single transaction without any problem, so why so bloody many for this?
    Maybe it was good shit and they wanted to stock up, especially since they knew other agents would steal 90% of it from the evidence storage.

    1. Re:Over 50 drug purchases. by jklovanc · · Score: 1, Insightful

      Last I've heard, they can arrest and charge with a single transaction without any problem, so why so bloody many for this?

      Police do that to establish a pattern of ongoing criminal activity and counter the "it was a one time thing" defense.
      Good segway to unsupported police bashing.

    2. Re: Over 50 drug purchases. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Interesting

      Most police bashing is quite well supported. Take for example the enormous waste of time and money this represents, while as many others have pointed out, actual crimes with actual victims are not dealt with. Of course, dealing with actual criminals is HARD and harassing people whose crime has no victim is so much easier and yet still headline grabbing.

    3. Re: Over 50 drug purchases. by david_thornley · · Score: 1

      That isn't valid police bashing. When police do what they are ordered to do by lawful superiors, and do it professionally, they're doing what they should. Police bashing should be reserved for unprofessional and illegal police behavior.

      --
      "When you have eliminated the unacceptable, whatever is left, however improbable, must be the truthiness" - Holmes
    4. Re:Over 50 drug purchases. by jklovanc · · Score: 1

      Maybe it was good shit and they wanted to stock up, especially since they knew other agents would steal 90% of it from the evidence storage.

      That is what I call police bashing. Care to quote any actual evidence that agent theft of drugs is anywhere near 90% or is that an assumption based on your opinion?

  15. And that's just one agency! by ron_ivi · · Score: 4, Funny
    Assuming most countries have many law enforcement agences; and there are many countries --- it makes me wonder if most of the traffic on Silk Road was just a bunch of undercover operations trolling each other.

    For example, in the US, I could imagine there were buyers from DEA, FBI, some DHS agencies, some DoD agencies, maybe even NYPD (heck, NYPD even has a branch in London, Israel, and Hamburg ) -- and that's just one country. Multiply by a couple hundred countries, and that really might have been a significant fraction of the market.

    1. Re:And that's just one agency! by dbIII · · Score: 2

      Lem wrote an awesome story along such lines (a lot of his stuff was political satire set in an SF environment to avoid getting dragged off to prison), and there was a Get Smart episode like that as well.

  16. Free Keen and Jury Nullification by Okian+Warrior · · Score: 5, Interesting

    I've been following the trial with some interest.

    The Free Keene group went down (from NH to NYC) to protest the trial and hand out Jury Nullification pamphlets, for which they were threatened by the judge.

    The government is using threats to prevent jury nullification information from getting to potential jurors. Doesn't seem fair to me, but then the constitution is probably written in some strange dialect of English where the meaning is something different to a lawyer.

    It occurs to me that this is one way we can have an effect on government in addition to the vote. By informing people about jury nullification, we can encourage juries to ignore unfair laws.

    1. Re:Free Keen and Jury Nullification by whoever57 · · Score: 3, Interesting

      Doesn't seem fair to me, but then the constitution is probably written in some strange dialect of English where the meaning is something different to a lawyer.

      Substitute Supreme Court for Humpty Dumpty:

      'When I use a word,' Humpty Dumpty said, in rather a scornful tone, 'it means just what I choose it to mean -- neither more nor less.'

      --
      The real "Libtards" are the Libertarians!
  17. Result by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

    The federal government were very pleased with the quality of their purchases and 9/10 would recommend them to a friend. A+

  18. jeez by wept · · Score: 2

    for all the sophistication, you'd think the silk road would have asked if you are a cop during registration. you know they have to say "yes" if they are.

    1. Re:jeez by ihtoit · · Score: 1

      actually, no they don't.

      --
      Political debates have me rolling my eyes so much I think I got optical whiplash. I should sue. - Foamy The Squirrel
  19. Local middle school? by matria · · Score: 1

    Big deal. 30 years ago my kids in middle school could get anything you can imagine right there at school. That hasn't changed at all, in spite of suspending girls for having Midol in their backpacks. More people are using drugs (including alcohol and tobacco - it's the money, stupid!) than ever before. Considering the scandals that are uncovered from time to time about the government using drug running itself to further its own interests it's pretty obvious that this is just one of the more blatant attempts to make their bloated "war on drugs" empire look like it's doing something.

  20. BarbaraHudson = known /. troll by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    See subject: Right, Barbara? Right -> http://slashdot.org/comments.p...

    1. Re:BarbaraHudson = known /. troll by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      should someone maybe define the word Irony for apk?

  21. "I am invincible!" by westlake · · Score: 1

    And what did they accomplish? They knocked Silk Road off the net for a few months, and in so doing helped it improve its security for next time.

    There is no tech and no system that can protect a geek from his own inflated ego. The problem isn't getting a geek to talk, the problem is getting him to shut up.

  22. Drugs are bad. Mmmkay? by houghi · · Score: 1

    Just the warning here what can happen http://i.imgur.com/1HTsarr.jpg

    --
    Don't fight for your country, if your country does not fight for you.
  23. Ah, in Sovyet America... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    ... the government buys pot and busts illegal online activities from their basement.

    That's the kind of activity I can stand up for. Where do I sign up for the government-sponsored pot?

  24. us government additional actions by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

    They also bought cypress hill records,bean bags, blacklights and hendrix posters...because reasons

  25. In other words... by EmagGeek · · Score: 1

    "law enforcement agencies spent well over a year casing the site: buying drugs"

    In other words, they were committing the same crimes. Oh wait, that's right, laws don't apply to our own government. They only apply to us. Silly me.

  26. Other notable discoveries here by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Feds really should look into some bitcoin miner manufacturers. Seems a couple of the shadier ones had involvement with Silk Road. One notable example is AMT aka Joshua Zipkin, who robbed his customers of apparently 5 million+ and on top of that may have made as much as 20 million from that money. It was also uncovered he had made some purchases on Silk Road using bitcoin by his own admission in some leaked chats to his customers he admitted drug use while in china. Currently he is residing in Bulgaria which has an extradition treaty with the US.