The Constant Battle: The Real Challenges Law Enforcement Faces When Catching Criminals

To comprehend the challenges posed by dark web markets and the utilization of cryptocurrency for law enforcement agencies, it is essential to first grasp the dynamics of decentralized markets, exemplified by platforms such as the Silk Road market. These markets predominantly operate through cryptocurrencies for the exchange of goods and services.

Decentralized markets leverage diverse digital devices to facilitate communication and real-time bidding without necessitating physical proximity between sellers and buyers. The absence of a fixed physical location for these markets introduces certain drawbacks which are also pros for criminals operating in the dark web. Notably, there is an absence of governing authorities to oversee transactions, offer assistance, or establish a legal framework to govern these activities (Tardi, C., 2021). 

Figure 1: Graphical representation illustrating how centralized and decentralized markets operate (Bjarghov, S., & Saif, A., 2021, pp.16).

Another challenge lies in the form of payment on dark web markets, where transactions are conducted through cryptocurrencies. As previously mentioned, Bitcoin is the most popular, but alternatives such as Monero, Ethereum, Ripple, and Litecoin are gaining traction (Giacomo, P. P., 2017). The difficulty these alternatives pose for law enforcement agencies is their lack of direct association with the real-world identities of buyers and sellers. This absence makes it challenging for authorities to trace illicit transactions. Even in the event of seizing a server hosting illegal cryptomarkets, identifying users and their locations remains formidable due to the widespread use of software such as Tor or Pretty Good Privacy (PGP), which is a popular tool enabling encrypted communication beyond the capabilities provided by the markets. In addition, another challenge surfaces with the continuous creation of cryptomarkets and the migration of sellers and buyers to these new platforms, where market administrators consistently enhance implemented security measures (Giacomo, P. P., 2017).

In addition, in the paper written by Giacomo, P. P., 2017, the author mentions that vendors often advise customers to give their real names on the delivery details. This is because they believe that the use of fake names increases the chances of parcels being identified as suspicious by post office employees and then being flagged for further investigation by authorities, potentially resulting in "controlled deliveries".

References:

Tardi, C. (2021). Decentralized market. Investopedia.

https://www.investopedia.com/terms/d/decentralizedmarket.asp

Giacomo, P. P. (2017). Behind the curtain: The illicit trade of firearms, explosives

and ammunition on the dark web. RAND.

https://www.rand.org/pubs/research_reports/RR2091.html

Image: Bjarghov, S., & Saif, A. (2021). Developments and Challenges in Local Electricity Markets: A Comprehensive Review. ResearchGate. https://www.researchgate.net/figure/Centralized-and-decentralized-market-clearing_fig1_350761591