Slashdot is powered by your submissions, so send in your scoop

 



Forgot your password?
typodupeerror
×
Crime Encryption Your Rights Online

Silk Road 2.0 Seized By FBI, Alleged Founder Arrested In San Francisco 219

blottsie writes The FBI has arrested the online persona "Defcon," identified as Blake Benthall, a 26-year-old in San Francisco, who the agency claims ran the massive online black market Silk Road 2.0. Benthall's FBI arrest comes a year after that of Ross Ulbricht, also from San Francisco, who's the alleged mastermind of the original Silk Road and still awaiting trial. The largest of those reported down is Silk Road 2.0. But a host of smaller markets also seized by law enforcement include Appaca, BlueSky, Cloud9, Hydra, Onionshop, Pandora, and TheHub. Also at Ars Technica.
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

Silk Road 2.0 Seized By FBI, Alleged Founder Arrested In San Francisco

Comments Filter:
  • by Anonymous Coward on Thursday November 06, 2014 @01:19PM (#48327109)

    Really, a second fool resides in the US while running an illegal operation? Go ahead, wave a red cape at the bull, but don't cry when it gores you.

    • by Anonymous Coward on Thursday November 06, 2014 @01:27PM (#48327185)

      And there will be a third and forth and fifth... It will NEVER stop. There is absolutely nothing the government can do to stop it. Nothing. There is 8 million a month spent on something relatively complicated to use (compared to say Amazon) and carries a risk of jail time. Think about that. Obviously there's a demand and that demand will be met no matter the cost. But it's not like there are more important things to spend the time and money on.

      • by mrchaotica ( 681592 ) * on Thursday November 06, 2014 @01:33PM (#48327245)

        I think the previous AC's point was not that it would eventually stop, but rather that eventually someone would come along who was smart enough to run his criminal empire from somewhere outside the US. Then we'd get a story about the CIA, instead of merely the FBI.

        • by ArhcAngel ( 247594 ) on Thursday November 06, 2014 @01:56PM (#48327409)
          CIA? Naw they'll just grease the wheels of the local politicians to arrest that guy and deport him without due process. At least that's the way Kim Dotcom tells it.
          • by swb ( 14022 )

            The CIA will be a vendor and customer..

          • by AK Marc ( 707885 )
            They can only do that with non-citizens. Has any citizen ever been deported from their home country to face trial for a "crime" they committed in a place they've never been for a "crime" that isn't a "crime" in their native country?

            Look at AllOfMP3. They were legal under Russian law, run by local Russians, so the US put pressure on them to use mob tactics to convince them it's in their "best interests" to shut down. Because there were no legal options to shut them down.

            And given that it's standard pra
        • Then we'd get a story about the CIA, instead of merely the FBI.

          Except for that article yesterday (?) about how the FBI wants authority to fuck with people outside the country now, too.

          • Nothing new. J. Edgar was chomping to get the power to project the FBI into places outside of the USA during WW2.

          • by AK Marc ( 707885 )
            There's nothing that bans the FBI from operating outside the US. There are rules banning the CIA and military from operating within the US for some things. The CIA could be disbanded tomorrow, with all the work handed to the FBI without a single law change (other than budget changes, if necessary). But it couldn't go the other way around.
            • Then I guess I don't understand why, if the FBI isn't explicitly barred from doing whatever-it-is, they aren't doing it already. The NSA had no qualms about doing things they clearly *weren't* authorized to, after all.

        • by fnj ( 64210 )

          A place with no extradition treaty beholdening it to the USA, for one thing. The list lacking such is pretty imposing:

          Algeria, Andorra, Angola, Armedia, Bahrain, Bangladesh, Belarus, Bhutan, Bosnia, Brunei, Burkina Faso, Burma, Burundi, Cambodia, Cameroon, Cape Verde, Central African Republic, Chad, China, Comoros, Democratic Republic of the Congo, Republic of the Congo, Croatia, Djibouti, Dubai, Equatorial Guinea, Eritrea, Ethiopia, Gabon, Guinea, Guinea-Bissau, Herzegovina, Indonesia, Ivory Coast, Kazakhs

          • If he was to run a drug ring from one of those countries, extradition is a moot point as he could simply be prosecuted by local courts. Best to find a place where the officals are easy to bribe.

          • by AK Marc ( 707885 )
            China will comply at all times, except for a policy of never extraditing a citizen.
      • by lgw ( 121541 ) on Thursday November 06, 2014 @02:19PM (#48327587) Journal

        ... It will NEVER stop.

        ... until the primary products sold there are legalized. Several more states legalized pot this month. I expect it will be sold on Amazon in my lifetime. That will certainly be the end for a black market for that particular good. How much of Silk Road's market (in terms of money actually spent) is for similarly innocuous stuff? For all the hype, I doubt the assassination market is real. There are of course some drugs that will never be legal - anyone know if that's a big business?

        The business for botnets is probably with us forever, but amazingly the price of cloud servers is coming down low enough where it won't make much sense to use a botnet except directly for criminal activities (DDOS etc).

        • Comment removed based on user account deletion
          • I could see it happening on Amazon eventually [amazon.com].

            In case that link breaks, it's a list of the states to which sellers of both domestic and international wines are allowed to ship.

            • Major difference is that alcohol is mostly regulated at the state level and exempted from being a controlled substance and at the federal level the BATFE's decrees how alcohol should be handled. Marijuana would have to be granted an exception as a controlled substance which I find doubtful and even if it were it would likely be regulated by an administrative agency like the BATFE. At present moment you can't even buy liquor or tobacco (both of these things regulated by the BATFE) on Amazon so I wouldn't exp
            • Long before you can "just buy pot on Amazon," I think it's much more likely we'll see Amazon provide a link between local sellers and local buyers, perhaps in places were Amazon already has local warehouses -- pardon me, "Fulfillment Centers."

              Arizona, California, Delaware, Indiana, Kansas, Kentucky, Nevada, New Hampshire, Pennsylvania, South Carolina, Tennessee, Texas, Virginia, and Washington.

              Sorry Colorado :)

        • ... until the primary products sold there are legalized. Several more states legalized pot this month. I expect it will be sold on Amazon in my lifetime

          I still can't even buy alcohol on Sunday mornings. Queue the Texas conservative jokes, however when I lived in the liberal northeast my town did not allow ANY alcohol sales.

          Getting rid of these laws is going to take a long time.

          • however when I lived in the liberal northeast my town did not allow ANY alcohol sales.

            Yeah, both sides can be real nannies, the only real difference often being the justification.

            A bunch of statists, the lot of them.

        • Several more states legalized pot this month. I expect it will be sold on Amazon in my lifetime.

          I keep hearing about people talking about how marijuana is legal in serveral states, especially since the other night, however state's rights are eroded to the point it is ultimately irrelevant because it is still a controlled substance at the federal level. I see it as being immensely harder to legalize a controlled substance of any kind at the federal level, especially if representatives from legalized states remain in the minority. Even if legalized states refuse to comply with the feds per the anti-comm

          • by lgw ( 121541 )

            Once enough states legalize, the federal legislature will find the courage to do likewise. It may even be the GOP who steps up - or at least there's been a lot of discussion from conservative bloggers about the prospect, it's just a matter of the elder social conservatives aging out of the GOP. (And, to be fair, SilkRoad does look like actual interstate trade).

          • I suspect that most law enforcement officers are at state level or lower. If they're not busting pot growers and sellers, the Feds aren't really likely to take up the slack.

      • by jythie ( 914043 )
        There are lots of things that will never be stopped, but that does not mean the fight against them is valueless.

        It should also be noted that just because there is a demand for something, people attempting to meet it should not automatically be lauded and the fight against it should not simply be written off as 'but people want it!'.

        Like many things, it has never been about 'stopping' it, measly trying to reduce things and the harm they do. That is not to say there is not a huge area for discussing what t
    • <SadTrombone/>

    • The US Feds are apparently working with the Gardaí of Dublin, and someone got caught with encrypted, but unlocked computers containing client CRM data. Now lots of dark sites all over the world are suddenly being exposed.

      http://www.irishexaminer.com/b... [irishexaminer.com]

  • Not smart (Score:5, Insightful)

    by Ralph Wiggam ( 22354 ) on Thursday November 06, 2014 @01:22PM (#48327131) Homepage

    Who is still using these sites after all of the Silk Road 1.0 arrests? You have to be pretty dumb to risk your freedom on some stranger's computer security skills.

    • by mc6809e ( 214243 )

      Who is still using these sites after all of the Silk Road 1.0 arrests? You have to be pretty dumb to risk your freedom on some stranger's computer security skills.

      And not just some single stranger.

      How many thousands of programmers/engineers are indirectly involved?

      Can you trust the programmer of the website?

      Can you trust the programmers that wrote the webserver code?

      Can you trust the programmers that wrote your web browser?

      Can you trust the programmers that wrote BASH?

      Can you trust the programmers that wrot

      • Comment removed based on user account deletion
    • Re:Not smart (Score:5, Insightful)

      by Kjella ( 173770 ) on Thursday November 06, 2014 @02:05PM (#48327497) Homepage

      What arrests? From what I gathered last time I looked into it, people advertised drugs with their public PGP key. The actual transaction with payment and shipping address happened encrypted between the seller and the buyer, they got Slik Road 1.0 the site but not anything like a customer registry or order history. Of course there's the risk of dealing with the individual dealer but hey, it's not exactly like that's risk free in the real world either. From what I gather it was pretty much like closing down a torrent site, everybody just moves to another site and carry on like before. Now who'd operate an online drug sales portal that's a good question, you're getting waaay too much exposure compared to the rewards. But that's for the 0,1% who runs the site, not the 99,99% that use them.

      • Re:Not smart (Score:5, Informative)

        by Ralph Wiggam ( 22354 ) on Thursday November 06, 2014 @02:18PM (#48327577) Homepage

        they got Slik Road 1.0 the site but not anything like a customer registry or order history.

        That's not true. The FBI had full admin access to Silk Road 1.0 for several months before they shut it down. People around the world were arrested.

        Most of the Google results are this new 2.0 arrest. Here are some articles about sellers from SR1.0 getting arrested.

        http://www.law360.com/articles/479177/8-more-silk-road-arrests-reported-in-us-europe
        http://www.nbcnews.com/tech/internet/silk-road-merchant-arrested-over-sale-drugs-guns-cash-n35691
        http://articles.baltimoresun.com/2014-09-05/news/bs-md-silk-road-sentencing-20140905_1_dread-pirate-roberts-ross-william-ulbricht-jacob-theodore-george-iv

        There's another reason why selling drugs online is a bad idea. After SR1.0 got shut down, there were a bunch of forum posts from people who had been fronted large amounts of drugs to sell online. The drugs had been sent out, and then the resulting bitcoins got seized by the Feds. Now they owed very unpleasant people huge amounts of money that they didn't have.

        • Re:Not smart (Score:4, Interesting)

          by NoImNotNineVolt ( 832851 ) on Thursday November 06, 2014 @03:02PM (#48327855) Homepage

          After SR1.0 got shut down, there were a bunch of forum posts from people who had been fronted large amounts of drugs to sell online. The drugs had been sent out, and then the resulting bitcoins got seized by the Feds. Now they owed very unpleasant people huge amounts of money that they didn't have.

          Whether in the drug market or the stock market, trading on margin has its risks.

        • Re:Not smart (Score:4, Informative)

          by Kjella ( 173770 ) on Thursday November 06, 2014 @03:25PM (#48328045) Homepage

          Of your three articles, the first is behind a pay wall. The second explicitly says they caught the package in the mail and worked from there. The third happened before the Silk Road bust and they said they used information in that case against Silk Road, not the other way around. Nothing really supports that the bust itself was used to round up sellers or buyers in large numbers.

    • The FBI claims that under Benthall's leadership, Silk Road 2.0, as of September 2014, allowed more than 100,000 people to buy illegal drugs, generating roughly $8 million per month in sales.

      I'm not sure what Silk Road's cut of that 8million is, but even 1% is a nice chunk of monthly revenue. More than enough to pay for a few AWS servers and live on.

      I highly doubt that these guys get into this type of service for any other reason than to make lots of cash. Legal channels are already clogged with robbers, er.. bankers (cheap shot I know) so how else do you try and make lots of money?

  • Money trail (Score:4, Interesting)

    by phantomfive ( 622387 ) on Thursday November 06, 2014 @01:24PM (#48327161) Journal
    If money is being transferred electronically, it can be traced back to you. That's the weakness of all illegal online marketplaces.
    • You need a form of currency that cannot be tracked that is accepted by the receiving party. Bitcoins are one kind of currency that fulfills that requirement, but there are also others that are less ... currency-y.

      • Re:Money trail (Score:5, Informative)

        by phantomfive ( 622387 ) on Thursday November 06, 2014 @01:56PM (#48327417) Journal

        You need a form of currency that cannot be tracked that is accepted by the receiving party. Bitcoins are one kind of currency that fulfills that requirement

        Bitcoin is absolutely not anonymous. It's more anonymous than a direct bank-to-bank transfer, but every transaction is recorded publicly.

      • by taustin ( 171655 )

        You need a form of currency that cannot be tracked that is accepted by the receiving party. Bitcoins are one kind of currency that fulfills that requirement, but there are also others that are less ... currency-y.

        Last I heard, the FBI very much wanted you to believe that Bitcoin is anonymous, because it's far easier to track than many other options.

        • Using stealth addresses, coinjoin or coinshuffle make bitcoin just as hard to track as physical cash, if not, harder. Purchasing items with Virgin coins that you can get with cloud mining make it impossible to track. Bitcoin is as anonymous or tranparent as you choose to make it.
      • False, bitcoin system has entrances and egresses that can be tracked. And you are a very weak link in that system

  • by Noryungi ( 70322 ) on Thursday November 06, 2014 @01:29PM (#48327203) Homepage Journal

    ... And I will say it again: if the FBI can arrest these people and bring down these ''black'' markets, who are supposed to be on Tor and protected by iron-clad crypto, it means only two things:

    1. Tor is not as secure as everybody says it is (because _____ insert your favourite conspiracy theory/security failure here).

    2. NSA/GCHQ, etc... justification for snooping on everyone (terrorists! drugs! guns!) is just complete and utter bull****. Hard detective work pays every time, and is probably more cost-effective than the massive surveillance and privacy violations we have right now.

    Please note that 1 and 2 are not necessarily opposed to each other. We may well have 1 AND 2 at the same time..

    • by TechyImmigrant ( 175943 ) on Thursday November 06, 2014 @01:33PM (#48327243) Homepage Journal

      >1. Tor is not as secure as everybody says it is (because _____ insert your favourite conspiracy theory/security failure here).

      It is. We know it is from the Ross Ulbricht case. They posed as a vendors and customers and sent malware to the browsers at the other end. Tor might be fine as an intermediate, but the endpoints are leaky as hell if you don't act with great caution.

        >2. NSA/GCHQ, etc... justification for snooping on everyone (terrorists! drugs! guns!) is just complete and utter bull****. Hard detective work pays every time, and is probably more cost-effective than the massive surveillance and privacy violations we have right now.

      We know it is. Parallel construction is well documented.

    • by Rinikusu ( 28164 )

      Tor is only as secure as the user is. What good is it to use tor to conduct business, then hand out your gmail address, or a skype name, or post on non-tor-based forums with the same fucking username you use on your darknet presence? Or if you configure your web server incorrectly? Just because it's the "darknet", it doesn't protect the users from their own ignorance and stupidity.

    • by dj245 ( 732906 )

      ... And I will say it again: if the FBI can arrest these people and bring down these ''black'' markets, who are supposed to be on Tor and protected by iron-clad crypto, it means only two things:

      1. Tor is not as secure as everybody says it is (because _____ insert your favourite conspiracy theory/security failure here).

      2. NSA/GCHQ, etc... justification for snooping on everyone (terrorists! drugs! guns!) is just complete and utter bull****. Hard detective work pays every time, and is probably more cost-effective than the massive surveillance and privacy violations we have right now.

      Please note that 1 and 2 are not necessarily opposed to each other. We may well have 1 AND 2 at the same time..

      Or 3- that the steps required to be completely anonymous on the internet are so demanding, and must be done without a single mistakes at any time ever, that no real human can obtain complete anonymity.

      This guy made some pretty serious mistakes. We can all get our heads together and develop a plan on what he should have been doing instead. But actually following such a plan, to the letter, without ever making a mistake, seems nearly impossible.

  • What I don't understand is how someone could believe that they wouldn't get caught. We all know now that everything we do on a networked computer is logged, and someday the government infrastructure will find the transactions and prosecute them. Are they thinking the amount of money was small enough to avoid notice?

  • The Government God forbids mere mortals from being allowed to escape their just punishments of soberly enduring the stupidity and drudgery of Western life - with the exemption of booze and prescription meds like Jesus would want, of course.
  • Funny thing is, some minutes before the news came out, bitcoin price had a surge, like these aren't bad news for the virtual money.

    I dare say that most markets have manipulation to some degree, but the all price of BTC seems to be a huge manipulation... specially when you do the math and see that the top 10 wallets, could bring the price down at once to less that 20$ in every exchange at the same time just by selling their coins.

    • Re: (Score:2, Informative)

      by Anonymous Coward

      ...and then they'd have none left and the price would shoot up again. Unlike paper money, there isn't an infinite supply of money to keep manipulating the market.

  • by troll -1 ( 956834 ) on Thursday November 06, 2014 @01:55PM (#48327405)
    These free trade sites will keep popping up as fast as they are shutdown. The government's position that unrestricted trade is dangerous is untenable.
  • The future is being developed and we are already testing a marketplace that cannot be shutdown.

    Decentralized marketplace for instantly trading uses blockchain technology, DHT, and mutisigniture arbitration.

    https://openbazaar.org/

    Beta 3 is about to be released. Join Us and support the future with a decentralized Ebay - https://github.com/OpenBazaar/... [github.com]

    http://tip4commit.com/projects/728

  • " FBI has arrested the online persona "Defcon," identified as Blake Benthall".

    No. The FBI has arrested Blake Benthall, alleged to be the online persona, "Defcon". It's for the court system to decide whether it agrees with that allegation.

Don't tell me how hard you work. Tell me how much you get done. -- James J. Ling

Working...