Slashdot Mirror


The Dark Web Has Shrunk By 85% (bleepingcomputer.com)

An anonymous reader quotes a report from BleepingComputer: The number of Dark web services has gone down significantly following the Freedom Hosting II hack that took place at the start of February, and only consists of around 4,400 services, according to a recently published OnionScan report. Previous research published in April 2016 by threat intelligence firm Deep Light had the total number of Dark Web services at around 30,000. Comparing the two numbers, the report shows a decrease of over 85% in the overall size of Dark Web in the last year alone. According to the recent OnionScan statistics, the Dark Web is laughably small, with around 4,000 HTTP websites, 250 TLS (HTTPS) endpoints, 100 SMTP services, and only 10 FTP nodes.

107 comments

  1. Has the dark web shrunk 85%? by GuB-42 · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Or has it became 85% darker?

    1. Re:Has the dark web shrunk 85%? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      This.

    2. Re: Has the dark web shrunk 85%? by Zero__Kelvin · · Score: 1

      Damn! I came here to ask the same question. I would say it is FAR more likely in fact. It doesn't make sense that 85% of them suddenly stopped being greedy and slimey all of a sudden. Every criminal thinks they will never get caught, or has already resigned themselves to the idea that it is part of the game. Some might have closed up shop, but 85%? I highly doubt it.

      --
      Guns don't kill people; Physics kills people! - John Lithgow as Dick Solomon on Third Rock From The Sun
    3. Re:Has the dark web shrunk 85%? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Nature hates voids.
      One bet is a newer and more secure darknet will restart (especially because of bitcoin). One step back just as the early mp3 music sites were pushed off. Even bit torrents have taken a whack - but money drives the whole kaboodle. With redirection, leaky VPN's - the problem is harder - but still has solutions.

    4. Re: Has the dark web shrunk 85%? by farrellj · · Score: 4, Interesting

      True! I doubt that they have simply gone off-line. They must have found some other system since they know TOR has been compromised.

      --
      CAN-CON 2019 - Ottawa's only book oriented Science Fiction Convention! October 18-20, Sheraton Hotel, Ottawa, Canada h
    5. Re:Has the dark web shrunk 85%? by DivineKnight · · Score: 1

      Thank You.

    6. Re: Has the dark web shrunk 85%? by Zero__Kelvin · · Score: 2

      I was thinking that, and it is still in my opinion the most likely explanation, but alternatively maybe 85% of the dark web was run by the US government and now they have cancelled the op?

      --
      Guns don't kill people; Physics kills people! - John Lithgow as Dick Solomon on Third Rock From The Sun
    7. Re:Has the dark web shrunk 85%? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      It became 50 shades darker, yes.

    8. Re:Has the dark web shrunk 85%? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Precisely...

      """the Dark Web is laughably small""" - or measuring it has become laughingly inaccurate.

      I know several dark net services that dont use tls, http, ftp or smtp...

    9. Re: Has the dark web shrunk 85%? by denis.goddard · · Score: 5, Interesting

      I briefly skimmed the OnionScan report when /. ran a story about the site a few months (?) ago. IIRC, her whitepapers said her scan did things like honor robots.txt and had other selectors for what would be indexed. The report was discussed on darkweb sites, not surprising if dark web operators took measures to not be indexed on principle.

    10. Re:Has the dark web shrunk 85%? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      No 85% lighter.

    11. Re: Has the dark web shrunk 85%? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      It's cute how people think a bad pun is insightful.

    12. Re: Has the dark web shrunk 85%? by Baron_Yam · · Score: 2

      After the first report:

      "HEY! I indexed all you guys who don't want to be indexed, because you tell me you don't want to be indexed!"

      After the second report:

      "If I ignore how much I ignored due to 'do not index me' requests, it looks like everybody is gone!"

      Yeah, perhaps not the best methodology.

    13. Re:Has the dark web shrunk 85%? by JasterBobaMereel · · Score: 1

      The part they counted previously, is now 85% smaller when they recounted it

      and the part that they didn't count previously is .... still not counted

      --
      Puteulanus fenestra mortis
    14. Re:Has the dark web shrunk 85%? by magical+liopleurodon · · Score: 1

      Very good point. Also, this article seems to only talk about Tor? Maybe people have switched to I2P?

    15. Re:Has the dark web shrunk 85%? by ShanghaiBill · · Score: 4, Interesting

      The only way to become "darker" is to become harder to access and with fewer on-ramps. That leads to fewer customers and lower revenue, and will lead to decline. So if law enforcement is forcing the dark web to become darker, that is a sign of effectiveness.

    16. Re: Has the dark web shrunk 85%? by farrellj · · Score: 1

      LOL!

      That could be the explanation! I hope not...But the American Government has done weirder things! :-)

      --
      CAN-CON 2019 - Ottawa's only book oriented Science Fiction Convention! October 18-20, Sheraton Hotel, Ottawa, Canada h
    17. Re: Has the dark web shrunk 85%? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      unless your customers arrive by sneakernet with lotsa cheese pizza with hotdogs ontop and a big purple triangle on a hat.

    18. Re:Has the dark web shrunk 85%? by JoeMerchant · · Score: 5, Insightful

      Calling TOR the Dark Web is like calling a movie you can stream on Netflix "obscure, exclusive, and little known."

      The real Dark Web is the stuff you don't know that you don't know about. Packets passing through the backbone that nobody but the sender and receiver understand.

    19. Re:Has the dark web shrunk 85%? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Same result.

      I2P is less secure. I2P requires clearnet bridges to work, and those bridges tend to not last very long. I2P is more or less designed to obfucate the source of piracy activity, not hide it.

      Tor is more secure, but likewise requires bridges to work. Unlike I2P, the bridges are established by dedicated clearnet nodes, and thus easily blocked in both directions to prevent abuse.

      The end result is that pirates make these services unusable for their intended purpose of secure communications by flooding the network with traffic that doesn't need to be secured in the first place.

    20. Re: Has the dark web shrunk 85%? by RandomFactor · · Score: 1

      You don't like dark humor?

      --
      --- Mercutio was right.
    21. Re:Has the dark web shrunk 85%? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Insightful? Insightful is offering proof, not questioning the answers with no serious retort.

      This kind of "argument" falls in line with climate deniers and anti-vaxxers.

    22. Re: Has the dark web shrunk 85%? by AmiMoJo · · Score: 1

      TOR isn't compromised. Stop spreading FUD.

      The loss of Freedom Hosting did take a lot of sites down, but it's likely a lot are still up and just unlisted. It's not like the normal web with DNS servers and ranges of IP addresses to scan for HTTP servers.

      --
      const int one = 65536; (Silvermoon, Texture.cs)
      SJW, n: "Someone I don't like, and by the way I'm a fuckwit" - AC
    23. Re: Has the dark web shrunk 85%? by Zero__Kelvin · · Score: 1

      I don't think that word "obfuscate" means what you think it means. Obfuscation is also often referred to as "Information Hiding" if that helps.

      --
      Guns don't kill people; Physics kills people! - John Lithgow as Dick Solomon on Third Rock From The Sun
    24. Re:Has the dark web shrunk 85%? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Yes citizen. That is exactly the ONLY WAY to become darker.

      Now return to your home, have a Coca Cola(tm) or Pepsi(tm) and watch an NFL(tm), NBA(tm), MLB(tm) or NLH(tm) game of your choice.

    25. Re: Has the dark web shrunk 85%? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      You're wrong mate, the definition is more like disguise or masquerade, not hide.

    26. Re: Has the dark web shrunk 85%? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Not the op btw..

    27. Re: Has the dark web shrunk 85%? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Hehe. Not even the devices understand it. Because packet tech changes every week or decade or never.

      This ugatity boogity 1990's hackers stuff. Ohhhh so hidden and dark!

      Lol. While I love Hackers and the other great films, real life is not even close. The dark web is dying. Because its not dark. Just because you need some onions and other fruit to acesss it so then the authorities can to. So then ....

      It was an experiment. A testing ground. And a place where freaks meet and get caught.

      Its over.

    28. Re: Has the dark web shrunk 85%? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Please learn software engineering, especially the OO Paradigm, then get back to us.

    29. Re: Has the dark web shrunk 85%? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Yes, it is. In fact it has never been that sure.

      1) Even if only input node and output node belong to the same owner, there is no anonymous connection, there are means to match input and output packages
      CIA has done is to put a lot of nodes, so statistically there are a lot of probabilities of picking in and out nodes.
      In fact, usually I only see half dozen of nodes.

      2) There are tricks in pages and javascript to send the real IP

      http://exiledonline.com/interview-with-yasha-levine-in-2013-tor-received-90-of-its-funding-from-the-us-government/

    30. Re: Has the dark web shrunk 85%? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      You're not very bright if even Ami is smarter than you.

      Yes, there are timing attacks to deduce an individual. Yes, idiots may keep JavaScript enabled.

      None of those mean TOR is compromised and the funding source is immaterial.

      For the first, don't do things that can be identified as you, the individual, by TOR.

      Don't use TOR to browse clearnet sites and expect anonymity.

      Don't enable scripting, of any type. That's just stupid.

    31. Re: Has the dark web shrunk 85%? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      "Obfuscate", in the sense that it was used, means "obscure." OP used it exactly as it's meant to be used. Please don't try to correct things that you're obviously clueless about.

    32. Re:Has the dark web shrunk 85%? by jon3k · · Score: 1

      No, just consolidated I assume. If Sprint collapsed and all the customers rushed to Verizon I don't think we'd say the cell phone market has shrunk.

    33. Re: Has the dark web shrunk 85%? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Onions aren't fruit, stupid.

    34. Re: Has the dark web shrunk 85%? by farrellj · · Score: 1

      If you believe that TOR is not compromised, then you should read this excerpt from this article in WIRED magazine...there are similar stories from many other outlets as well.

      "The Feds Would Rather Drop a Child Porn Case Than Give Up a Tor Exploit

      The Department of Justice filed a motion in Washington State federal court on Friday to dismiss its indictment against a child porn site. It wasn’t for lack of evidence; it was because the FBI didn’t want to disclose details of a hacking tool to the defense as part of discovery. Evidence in United States v. Jay Michaud hinged at least in part on information federal investigators had gathered by exploiting a vulnerability in the Tor anonymity network.

      “Because the government remains unwilling to disclose certain discovery related to the FBI’s deployment of a ‘Network Investigative Technique’ (‘NIT’) as part of its investigation into the Playpen child pornography site, the government has no choice but to seek dismissal of the indictment,” federal prosecutor Annette Hayes wrote in the court filing on Friday. She noted that the DoJ’s work to resist disclosing the NIT was part of “an effort to balance the many competing interests that are at play when sensitive law enforcement technology becomes the subject of a request for criminal discovery.”

      In other words, the feds are letting an alleged child pornographer free so that officials can potentially catch other dark-web using criminals in the future."

      https://www.wired.com/2017/03/...

      --
      CAN-CON 2019 - Ottawa's only book oriented Science Fiction Convention! October 18-20, Sheraton Hotel, Ottawa, Canada h
    35. Re: Has the dark web shrunk 85%? by AmiMoJo · · Score: 1

      That's not TOR, that's the browser that ships with the TOR Browser Bundle.

      --
      const int one = 65536; (Silvermoon, Texture.cs)
      SJW, n: "Someone I don't like, and by the way I'm a fuckwit" - AC
  2. dark web? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    So now Dark Web means SMTP and FTP? Web? Web. *facepalm*

  3. Or perhaps they're 85% sneakier? by TimothyHollins · · Score: 1

    That's nothing, when I put my hands over my eyes 100% of the dark web goes away. I suspect that our methods are similar.

  4. ...and all of them are run by FBI by hlavac · · Score: 3, Insightful

    There is no dark web these are probably all honeypots :)

    1. Re:...and all of them are run by FBI by Z00L00K · · Score: 4, Funny

      And they try to trap each other because they are run by different three letter agencies.

      --
      If builders built buildings the way programmers wrote programs, then the first woodpecker would destroy civilization.
    2. Re:...and all of them are run by FBI by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      How do they go about selecting which hapless innocent takes the blame whenever they catch each-other in this way? Who gets jailed from spoofed identities?

      I'm asking here, because there's no way that either agency's people are doing any time. Yet, someone does.

    3. Re:...and all of them are run by FBI by johnsmithperson123 · · Score: 1

      Mine certainly is. One AWS instance with a Tor hidden Wordpress site that I'm using to analyze script kiddie activities on the Darknet.

    4. Re:...and all of them are run by FBI by Bob+the+Super+Hamste · · Score: 1
      The old statement still holds:

      The Internet: where men are men, women are men, and children are FBI agents.

      --
      Time to offend someone
    5. Re:...and all of them are run by FBI by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      http://rulesoftheinternet.com/
      29. On the internet, all girls are men, and all kids are undercover FBI agents or Justice Decoys.
      30. There are NO girls on the internet.

      Might need add a rule for dark web

  5. Does not take into account by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Sites that are openly dark in plain sight.

  6. Moved over to i2p by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Moved over to i2p. .onion is so, so, so, 2009.

    1. Re:Moved over to i2p by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      If it has... they're not advertising it.

    2. Re:Moved over to i2p by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      So hipsters will love it! "I was on i2p before it was cool". ".onion is so 2009".

  7. Welcome to Conspiracy Theory Playhouse by geekmux · · Score: 1

    Like good chocolate, the dark web has gone 85% darker.

    The dark web found Darth Vader on Tinder, and has gone to the Dark Side.

    The dark web has been replaced by FBI honeypots. Pay no attention to those FTP servers. It's totally legit. Honest. We pinky swear.

    The dark web is actually a spoon, because the Sysadmin is Neo.

    Kind of fun playing conspiracy theory playhouse, but on a serious note, fucking FTP? And we wonder why identities get stolen by by grade-school kids these days. Even the dark web can't learn to be secure.

    1. Re: Welcome to Conspiracy Theory Playhouse by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      And less than 1/40 of the web content is served over https. Uh-oh!

    2. Re: Welcome to Conspiracy Theory Playhouse by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      More like 1/16 actually, my math sucks today. Ignore me.

    3. Re: Welcome to Conspiracy Theory Playhouse by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      It's ok we only have a 1/8 chance of being right on any given day.

    4. Re: Welcome to Conspiracy Theory Playhouse by geekmux · · Score: 1

      More like 1/16 actually, my math sucks today. Ignore me.

      Perhaps the more relevant analysis is what percentage of the most popular websites on the internet have switched to HTTPS by default in recent years.

    5. Re: Welcome to Conspiracy Theory Playhouse by Entrope · · Score: 1

      Don't feel bad, 15/16ths of statistics are made up on the spot.

    6. Re: Welcome to Conspiracy Theory Playhouse by Z00L00K · · Score: 1

      And any 1/2" fixed width spanner is always 65/128 in width causing round nuts.

      --
      If builders built buildings the way programmers wrote programs, then the first woodpecker would destroy civilization.
    7. Re: Welcome to Conspiracy Theory Playhouse by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      My nuts are round. Mostly.

  8. Not all activity is illegetimate by DrYak · · Score: 5, Informative

    It doesn't make sense that 85% of them suddenly stopped being greedy and slimey all of a sudden.

    Every criminal thinks they will never get caught, or has already resigned themselves to the idea that it is part of the game. Some might have closed up shop, but 85%? I highly doubt it.

    Not 100% of what goes on the dark web is criminal.

    Take tor as an example:

    Yes, some of them use .onion tor web services for the purpose of hiding ethically-dubious criminal activities.
    (silk road used to be an example back then).

    BUT, some use them for very practical reason like evading censorship (though it is *still* considered illegal in some specific jurisdiction, globally it's not and it's hardly unethical).
    The popular Duck Duck Go search engine also has a .onion tor server.
    If you're in China, and want to get informations about Tibet or the Tiananmen Massacre or simply about Taiwan, you can't through a normal search engine. They are either blocked in China or collaborate with the government and only report government-approved informations.
    On the other hand, if you have access to the tor network (along with VPNs that's one of the few popular solutions to get around China's Great Firewall) you can search the web using Duck Duck Go's onion tor server. (And then read the source using your tor socks proxy).

    As needs come and go, or because ressources are limited, some of these non-criminal dark web site are going to disapear.

    --
    "Sufficiently advanced satire is indistinguishable from reality." - [Tips: 1DrYakQDKCQ6y52z6QbnkxHXAocMZJE61o ]
    1. Re: Not all activity is illegetimate by Zero__Kelvin · · Score: 1

      Not everyone who buys Zig Zag wraps is rolling a blunt either (only about 99.99% are.) What's your point?

      --
      Guns don't kill people; Physics kills people! - John Lithgow as Dick Solomon on Third Rock From The Sun
    2. Re: Not all activity is illegetimate by denis.goddard · · Score: 2

      I use tor for random browsing all the time. Just using the network increases its usefulness, same way encrypting all emails increases the part of the digital universe that has "gone dark" to spy orgs of all stripes

    3. Re: Not all activity is illegetimate by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      joints not blunts, you fool. a blunt is typically rolled from cigar paper. so you run off some made up number about something you are wrong about. impressive.

    4. Re: Not all activity is illegetimate by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      joints not blunts, you fool. a blunt is typically rolled from cigar paper. so you run off some made up number about something you are wrong about. impressive.

      The parent was only slightly wrong regarding the verbiage, smart ass.

      Regarding some "made up number", the number is more like 100% when it comes to blunt wraps, since everyone buys those for one damn reason. People sure as hell aren't buying grape-flavored shit to fill it with tobacco.

    5. Re: Not all activity is illegetimate by goarilla · · Score: 1

      since everyone buys those for one damn reason.

      Yes to try something new and fresh and have a flavoured smoke.

      People sure as hell aren't buying grape-flavored shit to fill it with tobacco.

      Ever heard of a hookah ? It's a bong usually used to smoke "flavoured tobacco". So I wouldn't feel confident to put the 100% number out there, heck I know people who use tips and long leaves regardless of the cilinder's contents.

    6. Re: Not all activity is illegetimate by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Your made up number compared to the other's made up number have no significance in regards to the article's made up number, and the imaginary criminal human race that does not exist, only in the heads of corporate autonomous fools and rednecks.

    7. Re: Not all activity is illegetimate by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Not everyone who buys Zig Zag wraps is rolling a blunt either (only about 99.99% are.)

      You're not an authority on this, are you?

    8. Re: Not all activity is illegetimate by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Since (by your out-of-your-arse estimation) 0.01% of the activity is non-criminal, what is your point?

    9. Re: Not all activity is illegetimate by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      You are the fool. Zig Zag sells blunt wraps specifically for that purpose. He wasn't taking about rolling papers. You are evidently the clueless one.

    10. Re: Not all activity is illegetimate by Zero__Kelvin · · Score: 1

      Indeed I am, and quite proud of it thank you very much

      --
      Guns don't kill people; Physics kills people! - John Lithgow as Dick Solomon on Third Rock From The Sun
    11. Re: Not all activity is illegetimate by Ol+Olsoc · · Score: 1

      Not everyone who buys Zig Zag wraps is rolling a blunt either (only about 99.99% are.) What's your point?

      Oh Gawd, they are going to crucify you since you messed up between joints and blunts. But your point is still valid.

      If you use Tor, you are immediately interesting. If you have something new, it better use invisible packets, or it is only a matter of time before you are found out. The internet is an inherently insecure place. Perhaps some day people will understand that.

      --
      The shepherds did so well protecting the flock that the sheep no longer believed that wolves existed.
    12. Re: Not all activity is illegetimate by pr0fessor · · Score: 1

      I would like to point out that there are a lot more places that sell wraps than places that sell tobacco you could put in them. The ratio in my town is about 11:1 granted that's not 100% although it is approaching statistically insignificant.

    13. Re:Not all activity is illegetimate by JoeMerchant · · Score: 1

      So, I'd call TOR the "light grey market" of the web, just shady enough to slip past those who haven't bothered to shut it down yet.

      It's also a good way to draw attention to yourself... very few people actually use it, so a search of just them is much more practical.

    14. Re: Not all activity is illegetimate by goarilla · · Score: 1

      That's kinda weird.It's different here across the pond. I've yet to find bluntwraps in places that do not sell tobacco.
      And not all tobaccoshops or nightshops sell them anyway. I would like to say it's 3:1 (tobacco store vs tobacco store with wraps).

    15. Re: Not all activity is illegetimate by pr0fessor · · Score: 1

      Cultural geographical differences... I image that the average US town is more like where I am a lot of places that sell wraps and very few that sell tobacco.

      A hookah on the other hand is probably harder to come by since I rarely see them, although we used to have a Turkish restaurant with hookahs where you could get a smoke after dinner.

    16. Re: Not all activity is illegetimate by Zero__Kelvin · · Score: 1

      They have already tried and failed miserably. I specifically referred to Zig Zag (blunt) wraps, not rolling papers. I just rolled a blunt (not joint) with one ... Green Apple flavor and Cinderella Cush. Yum!

      --
      Guns don't kill people; Physics kills people! - John Lithgow as Dick Solomon on Third Rock From The Sun
    17. Re: Not all activity is illegetimate by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      the dark web is natorious for come and go sites. there was something with a web provider fairly recently though.

    18. Re:Not all activity is illegetimate by AmiMoJo · · Score: 1

      There are lots of legitimate uses closer to home too. Looking up medical information that you wouldn't want traced back to you, for example. Pretty much anything you might use "private browsing" mode for, if you understand the limitations of it.

      --
      const int one = 65536; (Silvermoon, Texture.cs)
      SJW, n: "Someone I don't like, and by the way I'm a fuckwit" - AC
    19. Re: Not all activity is illegetimate by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Hey, second time you look like a cunt haha - repeating things you've heard ,about things you don't understand..

    20. Re:Not all activity is illegetimate by SuricouRaven · · Score: 1

      I've never used Tor, but I used to use Freenet, and the bulk of it consisted of the following:
      1. Piracy. Music, movies, anime, the usual.
      2. Porn! Of course. Surprisingly, not much really bizarre and kinky stuff.
      3. Crypto-anarchist enthusiasts and free-speech advocates.
      4. Paranoid political nutters describing how the UN is going to use FEMA camps to incarcerate gun owners.
      5. Paranoid religious nutters describing how the Beast will take over the government and force Christians to have gay sex.

      I'm sure much more illegal stuff could be found if you looked hard enough, but I never found it in the public indexes.

    21. Re: Not all activity is illegetimate by micahraleigh · · Score: 1

      That's a quick way to get on a bunch of government watch lists.

      The deep government has no problem charging you higher tax rates based on your opinions.

    22. Re: Not all activity is illegetimate by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Immaterial but the nomenclature traditionally refers to using tobacco leaves, usually from cigars, and not what Zig Zag, and others, are using today. This may be the basis for the commentary and confusion.

      Inasmuch as I recollect, blunts also traditionally contained tobacco mixed in as well as using the leaf for the wrap.

      As I said, this is immaterial. I will say there are legitimate uses for TOR and, more specifically, .onion domains. There are, for example, divisive topics of discussion that are legal but prohibited on traditional sites. Finding a forum allowing such is much easier on the .onion domains, from my observations. While finding an open web hosting company which would allow such, as a mainstay, is exceedingly difficult if not impossible. Another use would be to get around censorship which may, or may not, be illegal and will vary per jurisdiction.

      I don't have much use for it, personally. I have browsed around it quite a bit and won't even bother trying to argue the numbers you made up. I don't think I'd be very good at remaining anonymous. My verbosity and word choice is rather specific and could probably be used to identify me to a dedicated person. Also, I am not even remotely interesting, but I digress.

    23. Re: Not all activity is illegetimate by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I just rolled a blunt (not joint) with one ...

      That explains SO much about your posting history!

    24. Re:Not all activity is illegetimate by aliquis · · Score: 1

      I use Tor and VPN for contests and to change region pricing..

    25. Re: Not all activity is illegetimate by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      What the hell are you talking about? He is quite correct. You buy a Zig Zag Blunt wrap and roll a blunt. Nobody uses them to roll cigars, idiot.

    26. Re: Not all activity is illegetimate by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      By your estimation, only 1 person in 10,000 buying a Zig Zag wrap uses it for tobacco. I think it's apparent that you're clueless on this topic. Please move along to something you understand.

    27. Re:Not all activity is illegetimate by Mike+Van+Pelt · · Score: 1

      Not 100% of what goes on the dark web is criminal.

      Take tor as an example:

      Yes, some of them use .onion tor web services for the purpose of hiding ethically-dubious criminal activities. (silk road used to be an example back then).

      BUT, some use them for very practical reason like evading censorship (though it is *still* considered illegal in some specific jurisdiction, globally it's not and it's hardly unethical).

      Or, my main use for it: investigating sketchy links in spam. There's a fraction of these malware-serving web pages that specifically check for IP addresses belonging to companies and organizations that fight this stuff. I've found that if I curl the page normally, I get something entirely innocuous, but if I curl it through tor ... there's the malware.

      Alas, most of them are now blocking tor exit nodes...

    28. Re:Not all activity is illegetimate by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      > The popular Duck Duck Go search engine also has a .onion tor server [3g2upl4pq6kufc4m.onion].

      Why hasn't TOR Browser made this the default yet?

      Why has even OnionShare (1.0...yay!) made, well, an .onion until very recently?

      Dare I ask for a onionized Slashdot page?

      Fact is, we need far more 'legitimate' and useful sites to be reachable through TOR directly. Consider it added redundancy to your main WWW setup!

    29. Re: Not all activity is illegetimate by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      > That's a quick way to get on a bunch of government watch lists.

      In case you haven't noticed: we're *all* on government watch lists!

      Parent got it right.

    30. Re:Not all activity is illegetimate by ShanghaiBill · · Score: 1

      Not 100% of what goes on the dark web is criminal.

      ... and not 100% of what is criminal should be criminal. I you want to use the dark web to buy recreational drugs, that should be nobody else's business, and I prefer you do that rather than patronize a local street dealer.

    31. Re:Not all activity is illegetimate by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      This.
      A YouTuber called SomeOrdinaryGamers posts an hour long video showing off hidden services every week.
      He's done 87 videos with no sign of slowing down or repeating himself.
      And 99% of the stuff he shows is perfectly legal or scam sites that pretend to be red rooms or hitmen for hire.

    32. Re: Not all activity is illegetimate by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Agreed

    33. Re:Not all activity is illegetimate by JoeMerchant · · Score: 1

      Congratulations, you have made the list of "the usual suspects" as described in the film Casablanca.

      What I'd like to see is some kind of analysis of TOR traffic vs normal internet traffic, not bytes up/down but connections made. I suspect it's less than 1%, which already makes it a better hunting ground for illicit activity, probably much less than 1% in reality.

    34. Re:Not all activity is illegetimate by aliquis · · Score: 1

      Well.. I also post "racist" (anti-refugee pro-myownculture & people) and anti-government stuff and back in the days tried to trigger Echelon on IRC :D, many years ago I used to send encrypted e-mails and ran an IRC server on LinkNet (SSL IRC mostly used by pirates) which I also used. I speak pretty open about what I think and as a younger person of myself I always used my correct name and e-mail because I thought that was how a society should be, that one should be free to say whatever one wanted and be safe even though doing so.
      So chances are I may have made the list one way or the other anyway :D

      My Tor usage isn't near 1% of the traffic, as for connections .. it can't be 1% there either :), and then I at-least _USE_ it occasionally.

    35. Re:Not all activity is illegetimate by JoeMerchant · · Score: 1

      I put myself on "the list" by direct application about 8 years ago: http://mangocats.com/stegamail...

      nothing bad has happened, yet.

    36. Re:Not all activity is illegetimate by JoeMerchant · · Score: 1

      What kind of 2107 message board has no edit function?!? - 5 ish years ago in 2012....

  9. conduit, not end-point by DrYak · · Score: 5, Interesting

    So now Dark Web means SMTP and FTP? Web? Web. *facepalm*

    More seriously : Nope, not at all.

    Dark Web has nothing to do with *what* you're talking to (usually websites, so usually HTTP/HTTPS),
    but *how* you talk to (instead of opening a simple TCP connection between your laptop and a webserver, you send your request using some form of indirect complex hard-to-track routing. e.g.: TOR (The Onion Router)).

    On the tor network, there are such things as tor servers which are accessed using a special address.
    e.g.: Duck Duck Go has one.

    From the outside, it doesn't look like your laptop is connecting to DDG's server.
    It only looks like a bunch of tor nodes passing packets around.

    At least in the case of Duck Duck Go, they also have an official DNS name that is registered to them, an IP address that can be backtraced to the server on the rack in the data-center where they are renting (or to the CDN that can then in turn further find them).

    But some server only exist as obscure Tor keys. It's very hard to trace them in the real world.

    Hence the name "Dark Web". The web of server that is hard to trace cause they don't work over plain vanilla TCP/IP.

    --
    "Sufficiently advanced satire is indistinguishable from reality." - [Tips: 1DrYakQDKCQ6y52z6QbnkxHXAocMZJE61o ]
  10. Don't worry, it'll grow back by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I have the same problem when I go swimming in cold water.

  11. Are you sure? by Mozai · · Score: 1

    Isn't the point of the "Dark Web" is that it is obfuscated? You can count all the things you know about, but how can you count the things you don't know about?

    1. Re: Are you sure? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Extrapolation. They also don't actually ask every American how they feel about the politicians, believe it or not. Yet, they still publish those polls...

  12. Just need one... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I don't need hundreds or thousands of sites. I have found one, good, reliable market. This all you really need. I don't need much: drugs and hacked log-ins to porn sites.

  13. Same as Before? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Does it still work the same as before? Uh, yes. So, what's the problem?

  14. How does OnionScan work? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    It's hard to believe that they have the ability to discover most darknet sites. If you discover them, sure, you can atttempt to crawl them and try various tricks to learn about them, but what's the step before that?

    Are they spidering from some well-known central directories, just following links? That can't work. Are they "wardialing" addresses? I don't get it. It's hard enough to even survey the non-dark net!

  15. *That* Quote by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    “So this is how liberty dies–with thunderous applause.”

    The tools of revolution may be useful for crime but are necessary for revolution.

  16. Local uses by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    There are lots of legitimate uses closer to home too. Looking up medical information that you wouldn't want traced back to you, for example.

    Or watching porn, if you don't want every single agency to learn your weird fetishes...

  17. Cultural variance by DrYak · · Score: 1

    It's also a good way to draw attention to yourself... very few people actually use it, so a search of just them is much more practical.

    Depends on the region. Europe in general is much more privacy conscious. Specially some central / northern parts (E.g.: Germany, Switzerland).
    Here you find people who use Tor regularily, just for the sake of keeping their life private.

    You can thank these kind of people to help fill tor with background noise traffic.
    Their are the one you make your reading of the anarchist cookbook less obvious
    And who make "rounding up all tor users" completely impractical.

    --
    "Sufficiently advanced satire is indistinguishable from reality." - [Tips: 1DrYakQDKCQ6y52z6QbnkxHXAocMZJE61o ]
  18. Shine a flashlight down a dark tunnel by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    ...and the rats retreat to the shadows.

    It's no longer the 'Dark Web' if everyone knows what it is and how to get on it.

  19. What happened to /.? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I come back after all these years and it's basically dead. What a sorry pathetic end to a once great site.

  20. Shouldn't this affect bitcoins? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Bitcoins keep going up, but it's hard to believe that value is driven by real world uses, is that incorrect? Asking as a real question, not a statement.

    I'd thought the rising price meant a thriving dark web where the currency needed to exchange there was becoming more in demand. So either that isn't the reason for the rising value, or perhaps the dark web is indeed darker than we think?

  21. "laughably" by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Ha ha!