(True Activist) Because cryptocurrencies are a threat to the banking elite, they are now threatening to close accounts if customers link them to Coinbase.
Cryptocurrency user Jordan Spencer recently received a letter from his bank warning him that his account would be closed if he continued to buy and sell cryptocurrency through the popular website and app Coinbase. The bank, Lakestone Bank and Trust also ominously threatened to keep an eye on his account to make sure that he obeyed.
Spencer posted the letter in a Facebook group for Ethereum traders to warn others about possible penalties or sanctions from banks.
“We are happy to have you as a Lakestone Bank and Trust customer and would like to fulfill your banking needs, but it has come to my attention that you are making purchases and receiving funds from Coinbase.com – A type of business transaction that is against Lakestone’s policies and will need to be discontinued immediately. We will continue to monitor your account and if we see that these types of transactions continue we will be forced to take other action, up to and including closing the account.”
The post quickly went viral and created an uproar among cryptocurrency enthusiasts, who quickly spammed the bank’s Facebook page with negative reviews and comments.
Cryptocurrency is obviously a threat to the traditional financial system, with a market cap of over $600 billion and rising every day, which far exceeds that of most major banks.
It was reported this week that daily cryptocurrency markets are now doing the same volume as the New York Stock Exchange.
Last week, the SEC issued a statement warning investors about cryptocurrencies not being regulated by governments. The statement is interesting considering that the SEC has allowed, if not assisted, in the many financial scams that have left so many people destitute.
“SPEAKING BROADLY, CRYPTOCURRENCIES PURPORT TO BE ITEMS OF INHERENT VALUE (SIMILAR, FOR INSTANCE, TO CASH OR GOLD) THAT ARE DESIGNED TO ENABLE PURCHASES, SALES, AND OTHER FINANCIAL TRANSACTIONS. THEY ARE INTENDED TO PROVIDE MANY OF THE SAME FUNCTIONS AS LONG-ESTABLISHED CURRENCIES SUCH AS THE U.S. DOLLAR, EURO OR JAPANESE YEN BUT DO NOT HAVE THE BACKING OF A GOVERNMENT OR OTHER BODY. OTHER OFTEN-TOUTED FEATURES OF CRYPTOCURRENCIES INCLUDE PERSONAL ANONYMITY AND THE ABSENCE OF GOVERNMENT REGULATION OR OVERSIGHT. CRITICS OF CRYPTOCURRENCIES NOTE THAT THESE FEATURES MAY FACILITATE ILLICIT TRADING AND FINANCIAL TRANSACTIONS AND THAT SOME OF THE PURPORTED BENEFICIAL FEATURES MAY NOT PROVE TO BE AVAILABLE IN PRACTICE,” THE STATEMENT SAID.
Many cryptocurrency traders are fearing that more restrictions and regulations from governments are likely on their way.
If these sort of crackdowns from banks aren’t resisted by customers, we can expect them to increase. The centralization of power and control of currency is what gives the banking elite their power—cryptocurrency is a threat to that power as its very nature is based on decentralization.
As we reported earlier this week, the idea of cryptocurrency has actually been popular among crypto-anarchists and privacy experts for decades, and was predicted in Timothy May’s 1994 manifesto “The Cyphernomicon.” In the book, May prophesized about “sophisticated financial alternatives to the dollar, various instruments, futures, forward contracts, etc.”
Cryptocurrency is providing this financial alternative. Banks can either respect the wants and needs of their customers through facilitating a mutually beneficial relationship with those who wish to deal in both US dollars and crypto—or, they can die a slow economic death as cryptocurrency makes them obsolete.
Lakestone Bank and Trust appears to have made their decision.
Bitcoin critics are often fond of claiming Bitcoin as “criminal money.” How true is this? One study tries to give concrete data to such accusation.
For many Bitcoin non-believers, one of the most prominent anti-Bitcoin arguments is that it’s a currency used by criminals.
Such reasoning has been debunked by the Bitcoin community several times, but it would be interesting to see what the actual data stays.
The Foundation for Defense of Democracies’ Center on Sanctions and Illicit Finance, together with blockchain analytics firm Elliptic, recently conducted an extensive study to attempt to uncover how much of the circulating Bitcoin funds are used for illicit activities.
To make the data more manageable, the study narrowed the sample from 2013 to 2016. According to Elliptic, they used a forensic analysis tool to sort through the data.
The method generally makes use of known data sets that are linked to illicit activities, running the parameters through more than 214 conversion services like mixers, gambling sites and currency exchanges.
In all, the results were surprising to say the least. According to the study, only less than 1 percent of Bitcoin circulation is linked to illicit activities.
The study also published other compelling results. The researchers found that cryptocurrency exchanges received the highest amount of known illicit Bitcoins.
What’s more interesting is that 50 percent of the illicit Bitcoins went through two Europe-based cryptocurrencies. However, this is not really surprising as exchanges are responsible for carrying out large amounts of cryptocurrency conversions.
When it comes to Bitcoin laundering, the study shows that mixers and gambling sites are the go-to source for “washing” services. The data also shows that 97 percent of the volume going through mixing and gambling sites can be traced back to only three services.
And from that, half of the volume is linked to illicit activities.
Another interesting result, though not really surprising, is that 97 percent of the illicit Bitcoin circulates in darknet markets like the now-defunct Silk Road and AlphaBay. The only year that the 97 percent dipped to 80 percent was in 2016.
According to the 2016 data, the rise of ransomware was the cause of the shift. It’s typical for ransomware to ask for payment in Bitcoin. When the ransom is paid, the Bitcoin is then considered as illicit.
Since ransomware is not a darknet market, the circulating illicit Bitcoin picture also skewed.
What is surprising is that the data suggests that the flow of illicit Bitcoins going through darknet marketplaces is largely centralized.
For each year, over 50 percent of the illicit Bitcoins are linked to less than two darknet marketplaces.
In 2013, around 90 percent of the illicit Bitcoin were linked to Silk Road. In 2014, Agora and Silk Road accounted for 80 percent of the circulating illicit Bitcoins.
In 2015, almost half of the illicit Bitcoin was in Agora. In 2016, Nucleus Market and AlphaBay held 75 percent of the circulating illicit Bitcoins.
One of the main reasons why the Bitcoin laundering study was instigated is for better policy-making. The Foundation for Defense of Democracies gave a recommendation that law enforcement agencies should focus more on darknet markets, online gambling sites and Bitcoin mixers as these are the locations in which a huge portion of illicit Bitcoin circulate or are “washed.”
When it comes to online gambling and Bitcoin mixers, the Foundation recommends stronger anti-money laundering enforcement. On the other hand, darknet markets need a different approach as these sites don’t comply with such regulations.
Further, if one darknet site is shut down, another opens.
The Foundation for Defense of Democracies also recommended that law enforcement officials should shift their focus to exposing the security vulnerabilities of such darknet websites to deter people from using the sites.
For the Bitcoin community, the narrative that Bitcoin is used for criminal activities is weak to begin with. Bitcoin supporters are also quick to point out that banning Bitcoin on the grounds of criminal activity is not logical; after all, the U.S. Dollar is also used to fund criminal activities, and you’ll never hear talks about banning the dollar.
There are a lot of key points attached to this specific matter. For example, a lot of cryptocurrency supporters believe that governments have no right to regulate nor monitor a person’s financial activity.
Another key point is that Bitcoin itself is simply not designed to be a great way to conduct money laundering. This is because every Bitcoin transaction is in the public blockchain ledger. The receiver, the sender and the amount is available for anyone to see.
If you do enough investigation, it’s possible to trace the money trail that will lead to arrest. In fact, many Silk Road users have been arrested this way.
Lastly, the Bitcoin community is also quick to point out that darknet websites are also using Monero, an alternative cryptocurrency that puts a high priority on security and anonymity.
With the recent Bitcoin laundering report, the cryptocurrency community can finally solidly claim that Bitcoin is not “drug money” as there’s already a study that shows that illicit Bitcoin activity accounts for less than 1 percent of Bitcoin activity.
Apple to Close Security Loophole Authorities Use to Hack into iPhones Q Apple now seeks to update its software by disabling ports after an hour of inactivity so that third parties can’t unlock iPhones without a passcode.
Over the years, Apple has gained a reputation in the tech industry as a company that offers quality and secured smartphones among other products.
In their bid to serve customers and emerge as one of the top tech leaders, the company has faced several legal tussles in the course of their journey.
In a move that is likely to make them lock horns with law enforcement personnel from time to time, the company seeks to seal several loopholes that are currently in use by third parties to unlock the devices of targeted individuals.
Apple devices have become a preference for those involved in illegal activities because of their security, memory storage and, last but not least, durability.
Several developers have even come up with versions of anonymous messaging apps that are compatible with iOS.
How Third Parties Unlock Apple Smartphones
In most cases, it is the authorities who have interest in unlocking Apple products because they tend to have interest in obtaining the information inside the devices.
What drives law enforcement bodies to have the devices unlocked is if they are undertaking a high-level investigation and they need some evidence which can be found in the smartphones.
Since they often do not have the much-needed tech expertise within their internal resources, what they do is outsource it form a third party, which happens to be security firms.
In the past, authorities such as the Federal Bureau of Investigation have approached Apple in a bid to have them unlock criminal suspects’ devices.
Apple CEO Tim Cook proceeded to write a public lettersaying that the company has respect for the law enforcement agencies such as the FBI, but they refuse to compromise the device by creating a backdoor for investigators’ use.
The primary reason is that they are engaging in an activity that is compromising the privacy of Apple customers.
The failure by Apple to cooperate made the FBI and other federal agencies to seek the services of firms such asGrayshift, founded by a former employee of Apple, as well as Cellebrite, an Israel-based firm.
The modus operandi is different when dealing with the above two companies. Forthe case with Cellebrite, the officers would send the phone to the company for unlocking, and it would cost several thousand dollars more than the price of the device.
But for Grayshift, it is a bit different since the security agencies would instead acquire a device known as GrayKey at the cost of $15,000, which they would use to decrypt the smartphones by themselves.
Before the police began using firms like Cellebrite and Grayshift, they would unlock the gadgets by themselves by trying to insert a multiple pins until the iPhone is unlocked. Because of this, Apple had to carry out software updates to keep their customers safe.
Over the years, Apple has gained a reputation in the tech industry as a company that offers quality and secured smartphones among other products.
Among theagencies using the GrayKey device is the Drug Enforcement Administration (DEA), a key player in the fight against opioid distribution which has been brought about by the darknet markets.
In a darknet-centric operation dubbedOperation Disarray, which was spearheaded by the FBI, the DEA was among the agencies that helped out in making it a success.
Now that the DEA is interested in devices that can unlock iPhones, one can connect the dots and conclude that perhaps there is a chunk of darknet users who are fond of using Apple devices.
It is not the first time that authorities have clashed with a company for designing products which are beyond their abilities to decrypt.
A few months ago, Canada-based Phantom Secure was also on the spotbecause of willingly developing products meant for darknet crime.
Measures Taken by Apple to Further Protect Customers
Following the move by the federal agencies and local enforcement personnel from different regions to seek the services of security firms to unlock iPhones, Apple has now begun work on how to ensure the existing technology can not bypass their devices.
The move has caused divergent opinions among persons from different backgrounds, with some supporting it and others against the idea.
What Apple intends to do is roll out a mass software update which would disable the ports used for charging and connecting a USB cable for transfers and plugging an earpiece after one hour.
In the past, the ports would still be active, giving third parties a way of compromising the devices no matter how long the phone remains unlocked.
The update will require only a password to be entered for the ports to be active, but it ultimately does not stop the user from being able to charge it.
Every Problem Has a Solution
The move by Apple to further sharpen their security will likely see more developers stepping up to implement their own solutions.
The burden of work will lie onto the hands of the authorities, and in a bid to try and get a solution, they will likely continue to seek the services of security companies.
In most cases, what transpires is that the same firms that have been offering solutions to such matters are consulted by the same clients who need alternatives to new problems.
For now, those using the devices might feel solace knowing that it will take some time for security firms to come up with a way to unlock the iPhone once Apple updates the software.
Analysis: The Use of Anonymous Messaging Apps on the Dark Web
Anonymous messaging apps are being used to facilitate offline trade among darknet users, potentially exposing themselves to the possibility of fraud.
The use of messaging applications to send instant messages has made communication not only convenient but also effective.
And as such, more industries—depending on the nature of activities conducted—will adopt a communication app that best suits them.
Currently, there are countless communication apps in existence and their use is dependent on the nature of activity conducted by the user.
The case is no different for darknet users who use certain types of apps to communicate with each other.
To determine which messaging platform is best, features such as security, cost and availability are put into consideration by an individual, organization and other large entities.
For darknet markets, different types of anonymous applications having unique features have been created over the years to offer maximum encryption and absolute anonymity for those who are using it.
However, for people to communicate they all need to use a tool from the same developer because different apps are not compatible with one another.
The Use of Anonymous Messaging Apps on the Dark Web
There are slightly less than a dozen well-known applications used by dark web users in their daily activities.
The case is evident because some of the darknet markets and forums have the option of users inserting their username or contact information depending on the messaging platform they use. In most cases, it is optional, but in others, one must provide their alias.
The fact that some communication apps are not very well known does not mean they do not provide excellent services.
But contrary, they may offer one of the best services, but what makes them not a preference for the majority of dark web users is the high cost. Often, a high percentage of users cannot all afford them all.
In a majority of cases, those who engage in selling are fond of leaving their alias on the vendor profiles for their customers to reach out to them in the event of any query on purchases.
Also, some of the markets and forums have a support section where their details on specific messaging platforms can be found so that in case of anything, the clients can get assistance in the shortest time possible.
How the Apps Are Shaping the Way Business Is Conducted
Since the early days of darknet markets, people would log in to a specific marketplace and buy goods with Bitcoin.
However, the integration of other digital tokens in marketplaces in the recent months has enabled individuals to have a wide variety of option when making payments.
After the first purchase, the buyer may proceed and acquire more goods and services from the same vendor, and in the process, an element of trust is established between the two parties.
So what happens is that a person who is interested in acquiring a particular good or service from a hidden site will log in to the website, select a product, choose a payment option and facilitate the payments.
A point to note is that there are many ways of getting scammed, and thus is the need to use the site’s escrow system where the buyer should place a No-Finalize Early (FE) as a precautionary measure of preventing fraud.
After the first purchase, the buyer may proceed and acquire more goods and services from the same vendor, and in the process, an element of trust is established between the two parties.
Since in most cases the vendor tends to leave their contact details on their profile, the buyer can proceed and contact them directly.
In the event the vendor has not left their communication details on their profile, it is common for the buyer to ask them for it and if they indeed use communication apps, then they provide them.
The end effect is that with time, buyers will start making offline communication with the sellers and in the process making offline payments.
When this transpires, the market loses to some extent because it generates commission after every purchase. From this, it is clear why many darknet markets discourage buyers from making offline payments.
Then we have the use of bots to respond to messages and dispatch orders depending on the type of good/service. Since the number of buyers continues to experience an upward trajectory with time, sellers are using bots to simplify things for themselves.
For those who have some skills in programming, they tend to create their own, but for those who do not, they can use the ones already created by others by purchasing depending on how they want it to function.
Of course, a bot with more features tends to go at a higher cost as compared to those with limited functionalities.
Risks Associated with Using Anonymous Messaging Applications
Despite the ease brought about by the apps, there are more risks associated with offline payments, and they are to the disadvantage of the buyer.
The primary risk is the possibility of fraud, which is a common occurrence on the dark web. This happens through the use of applications such as Jabber, Wickr, ICQ and others where vendors request for offline payments.
To make matters worse, they request for payments even before goods are sent or services delivered.
In the end, the sellers end up not delivering what they ordered.
So there is no way the person who made the payments is protected because first, they are dealing with illegal goods; second, there is no escrow; and finally, the buyer knows nothing else about the seller except for their username.
The sad part is that there are always those who will fall victim to scams no matter what transpires. It is like a norm in the business. Without cases of people scammed, then something is definitely wrong since the nature of activities conducted calls for the occurrence of such events.
Then we have companies such as Phantom Secure has been accused of manufacturing devices meant for criminals. In the end, the CEO ended up behind bars and facing legal suits alongside his associates for deliberately designing devices intended for the outlawed community.
What Phantom would do is take Blackberry devices and other smartphones, modify the hardware and software, and further encrypt it by adding excessive security features. By doing so, the messages sent would be beyond the interception of third parties, and in particular, law enforcement personnel.
In the process of manufacturing the devices and selling their services to the organized crime units, users were able to facilitate illegal deals and murders without any hindrance.
In the end, the arrest of the company executives and further operations by authorities to bring down the network led to the raid of other people in different part of Australia, the country with the highest number of Phantom users.
A Look at Some of the Most Popular Apps
The use of messaging applications to send instant messages has made communication not only convenient but also effective.
Apart from the above-mentioned apps (Wickr, ICQ, and Jabber), there are also other messengerssuch as Signal, Silent Phone, Telegram, and Silence.
All these apps have unique features which make them a preference to some darknet users.
Among them is security, which includes self-destructing messages, passwords when signing in and end-to-end encryption.
But out of all of these, there are some that stand out as compared to the rest.
Two good examples are Jabber and Telegram, which have gained popularity over the years because of their prime anonymity-centric characteristics.
For example, to have a Jabber account, one does not need to provide their actual details during the registration process and thus making it a perfect choice for users who want to remain anonymous.
In addition, Telegram has gained popularity because of its anonymity and lack of executive control.
Even though one is required to verify their phone number in order to use it, the use of apps that provide fake phone numbers has enabled users to use Telegram without giving any real information.
The other thing that has made Telegram a choice for most is the use of botswhich can be created by anyone, depending on their programming skills.
Apart from that, there numerous bots up for sale, and the price differs depending on the functionality.
With all these points in mind, it is evident that as long as the apps have their advantages, they also have disadvantages and hence precaution is always the best when dealing with vendors who happen to request for offline payments.
Terrorists are always developing new ways of attacking their targets and raising funds for their global operations keeping every step hid
The dark web is a fragment of the internet hosting mammoth numbers of domains that disguise the IP addresses of their host servers. The identity of the users and the brains behind the sites are almost impossible to tell.
Cyber-terrorism, which is best defined as the propagation of terror and extremism on the internet by terror groups such as ISIS, is equally active on the dark web.
With the reasonably high degrees of anonymity that the dark web boasts of, it is not surprising to witness the infiltration of individuals with terrorist ideologies on the dark web. They raise money through virtual currencies.
Law enforcement agencies have also surreptitiously penetrated into the dark web in pursuit of perpetrators. There has been substantial evidence laying claim that ISIS and terrorist groups that share its ideologies are soliciting the anonymity in the dark web to amplify their agenda and undertakings globally.
The reports cannot be downplayed as downright hearsay or propaganda. Law enforcement agencies globally are faced with an uphill task to essentially track and hunt down the cyber-terrorists operating on the dark web.
Is Bitcoin a Tool for Funding Terrorist Groups?
The cryptocurrency Bitcoin has risen in stakes and its popularity has soared amongst terror groups, using digital wallets for their transactions, mostly in Bitcoins.
They mostly prefer Bitcoins because they evade taxes to the Western countries and/or other nations where their ideologies are generally not well accepted. They are also able to avoid legal exposure and prosecution.
Cryptocurrency transfers rely on a decentralized system. Despite the young age of cryptocurrencies, the advancements in technology are causing a disruption in the financial sector.
This upset has the capability to precede new markets, beget more financial transparency, as well as provide populations with limited exposure to banking services with more access to capital.
A 2017 advanced crackdown on ISIS was thought to be a breakthrough in the hope that its operations would be crippled. In a twist of events, towards the end of 2017, the group had revamped and the site spreading their agenda kick-started an online drive to raise funds.
A link was affixed to publications on the site, with calls for donations in the form of Bitcoin. Reports by Israeli newspaper Haaretz established that the link directed to a donations-devoted site. The site was located on a page in a forum that dealt with the dealings of Bitcoins by the name CoinGate. Later law enforcement-initiated probes into the link did not lead to the forum.
This was a clear statement of the terrorist group’s emphasis on avoiding being tracked. The online drives to raise funds in Bitcoins have increased foothold on groups sharing terrorist ideologies.
Bitcoin transactions are recorded openly in a digital accounting entry called blockchain.
In Telegram, which is popular among ISIS members, a new Bitcoin address affiliated a terrorist group brought to light a succession of transactions from July 2016 to January 2017 with some accounts averaging almost $300,000 in transfers on the blockchain.
Cyber-terrorists have been known to use social media platforms such YouTube and Facebook to recruit willing members.
Cash that has absolutely no trail is their most favored funds-transmitting medium.
The emergence of new activities online may seem to suggest that these terrorist groups are supplicating Bitcoins. These are in turn spent without the aid of any intermediary.
Since terrorist networks are not in a position to carry out transactions freely in the formal banking setup, they often come up with underhand methods to acquire resources. Some media outlets sharing the terrorist groups’ ideologies have been quoted urging supporters to contribute funds to explicit Bitcoin addresses.
There have also been incidences where they solicit a contribution for the purported maintenance of their sites by also targeting sympathizers in Western countries. Some of these fundraisers have attracted little attention in the recent past with some donations being as low as $100.
In the past, it has been reported that the terrorist groups have carried out their operations through the use of Bitcoins. Some of these operations include terror attacks—for example, the 2015 Charlie Hebdo attacks in Paris, which was reportedly funded through Bitcoinsfrom the terrorist group al Qaeda in the Arabia Gulf.
The November 2015 attack in Paris was also reported to have been funded from a colossal digital wallet with vast amounts of Bitcoins.
Others include online fundraisers receiving donations in Bitcoins meant to procure firearms, ammunition, and explosives.
Growing attention on the Bitcoin-sourced funding of terrorist groups’ media outlets is substantial. This pinpoints to them having possibly identified influential usage of cryptocurrencies in their targets and resolutions, the entrenchment of their propaganda and the organization of their activities.
Most of their dedicated web pages can only be accessed through the aid of the Tor browser. In addition, according to the Terrorism Research and Analysis Consortium (TRAC), the terrorist groups mostly use Telegram to propagate their propaganda and other media, such as videos, in a bid to experiment on new ways to further expand their financial support using Bitcoin.
Cyber-Terrorists Have Sought Refuge in the Dark Web
The current crisis globally is on how to fight increasing extremist activities brought about by terror groups such as ISIS. Capitalizing on the increasing growth of ISIS among other terror groups is now increasingly shifting the battle to online cyberwar.
This is by use of online messages and videos, the dark web and applications with the aim of radicalizing more people to becoming a new generation of cyber-terrorists.
The dark web, particularly in the modern days, has become a tool helping ISIS to spread their ideology and propaganda to online sympathizers across the globe.
Social Media Also Used as Recruitment Platform
According to Wulkan, the online fundraising drive on the ISIS website was tracked down.
Cyber-terrorists have been known to use social media platforms such YouTube and Facebook to recruit willing members.
One particular study published last yearanalyzed over 50 different Twitter user accounts and over 100 Facebook pages which generated over 2,050 results helped confirm the hypothesis.
It found that online hate is being used by extremist groups like ISIS for propaganda and recruitment initiatives.
This is being done through online videos being filmed and streamed professionally impressionable and young people. ISIS members are beginning to show the organization’s capability to form a global cyber-terrorism movement.
The dark web is also becoming the virtual playground for extremist views acting as an echochamber.
According to a Tel Aviv security analyst working for Singapore-based cybersecurity firm, there is concrete evidence that ISIS is making uses of highly anonymous networks on the dark web for radicalizing, recruiting and fundraising.
Concerns have also been tabled that the known ISIS and ISIL groups are making use of Bitcoin and other digital currencies that enable anonymous transactions and money laundering.
The Singapore-based cybersecurity firm uncovered evidence, where a terror cell thought to be connected to ISIS and operating in America, is requesting for Bitcoin in its fundraising effort.
Such evidence is being exposed to the public linking what claims to be ISIS cell fundraising using Bitcoins in the darknet, according to Ido Wulkan, a senior web-intelligence analyst at S2T, a Singapore company that develops data and cyber intelligence solutions for governments and corporations. The fundraising effort may indicate a worrying trend in the fight against terror, Wulkan said.
Due to the continued effort and cooperation between law enforcers and owners of social media platforms to delete ISIS-affiliated accounts, it is now almost obvious that ISIS global cyber-terrorists have sought refuge in the dark web, Wulkan added.
As seen in metrics on Tor data, the move led to an explosion in Tor usage in the country.
According to Wulkan, the online fundraising drive on the ISIS website was tracked down. This was done through a sealed referral forum in Turkey which has hackers as the users and has been associated with other extremist sites that are well known.
As part of the project, Wulkan used S2T’s GoldenSpear, a data recovery system, to obtain and analyze data.
This was after an article titled “Bitcoin and the Charity of Violent Physical Struggle” circulated onlinearguing that in order for ISIS to fund its terror operations, it needed to go outside the Western financial. The article was posted to a page on the dark web that provided a Bitcoin address through which funds could apparently be sent directly to the ISIS.
The crackdown on the ISIS-affiliated Bitcoin users has been fruitful in the recent past. Last December, 27-year-old Long Island resident named Zoobia Shahnaz was charged with fraud and money laundering to support terrorists.
She is reported to have moved around $85,000 worth of Bitcoin and other digital currencies. This was allegedly meant to be in solidarity with ISIS.
A few years ago, a teenage Twitter user in Virginia also pleaded guilty to charges of using the platform to teach others on the process of using Bitcoins, most of whom were ISIL followers.
What Ought to Be Done?
Cryptocurrencies have become widespread and they are receiving more coverage on conventional media.
Cryptocurrencies have become widespread and they are receiving more coverage on conventional media.
By keeping up with technological advancements, terrorist groups are well in light of the full potential that the new digital currencies possess, especially on a fundraising front.
The crackdown on Bitcoins by the law enforcement agencies is proving to be relatively trivial.
The terrorist groups could be feeling the threat of having their habitat being encroached and may eventually start experimentation on other newer cryptocurrencies that will prove lesser traceable and provide room for more anonymity.
The use of exchange services online has users of various cryptocurrencies dependent on third-party businesses. The dependency may render the users vulnerable to account suspension and the risk of being reported to law enforcement agencies. This may force the terrorist groups to adapt and minimize their use of similar platforms.
There is still the probability of online transactions being the preferred location for donations to terror affiliations by those who are tech-savvy and to whom security is of less importance.
There is still hope in the sense that Bitcoin is still not such a secure source of funding for the terror networks. Widespread use of cryptocurrency is still limited despite advanced public awareness. Little infrastructure for people to use Bitcoins on actual goods and services are some of the factors seem to discourage the terrorists, despite being outwardly informed.
Law enforcement authorities should adopt counterterrorism measures to conceive the paradigm shift leading to the funding of terrorism via cryptocurrency becoming a major threat and head off the possible threat. Some may include targeting recruiting persons with skills in computer science.
They should be on the lookout for changes in the cryptocurrency world, such as the adoption of more sophisticated and anonymous currencies and the growth of digital currency exchanges not adherent on anti-money laundering and/or know-your-customer (KYC) procedures.
Terrorists have been testing Bitcoin funding models for quite some time, despite the cryptocurrency field being in the juvenile phases of development, usage and reception.
The public needs to create more awareness in spite of some notable crackdowns on terrorist activities. Tech leaders and stakeholders ought to do more and especially with the industry still evolving, terrorists will try and tap into the evolution.
A look at new privacy-based cryptocurrency Bitcoin Private and its possible uses on the dark web.
A new privacy-focused cryptocurrency has been created and released recently, a fork from the first cryptocurrency Bitcoin.
It’s called Bitcoin Private, and it incorporates elements from both Bitcoin and Zclassic, a now-defunct cryptocurrency with strong focus on privacy, and the predecessor to Zcash.
Bitcoin Private uses the ASIC resistant proof-of-work mechanism Equihash, which means the developers hope to keep Bitcoin Private truly decentralized in that this algorithm it would allow and incentivize mining using machines miners at home could keep up with.
But is Bitcoin Private necessary in the world of many cryptocurrencies? What problem does Bitcoin Private solve?
Privacy of Bitcoin
It is no secret that Bitcoin is not a private cryptocurrency. Arguably, it is the least private transactional means ever created: allowing the tracking of any one coin through all of its transactional history from the coin’s first inception.
With that said, the mainstream media sources and those sources outside of the cryptocurrency community tend to throw the world “anonymous” around within the top three adjectives used for attempting to describe Bitcoin to their apathetic audiences.
It is not true. Bitcoin is not private.
It can be made virtually private, yes, but in the real world and in Bitcoin’s current use forms, it isn’t private without a decent amount of work—even then, it can be traceable. It should come as no surprise to you that large alphabet agencies such as the NSA have been actively attempting and have essentially succeededin tracking Bitcoin users. A solution is needed to solve this issue then, especially in the way that the dark web marketplaces operate.
But is Bitcoin Private that solution?
The Technologies Behind Bitcoin Private
When examining the technologies behind Bitcoin Private, we need to first understand a few things about Bitcoin, the core base for Bitcoin Private to exist.
It has full transparency over transactional history, applying each path of a coin into its main ledger (the blockchain). It is therefore by design that Bitcoin is in fact public—since each coin can be checked against all other transactions to ensure it isn’t “double spent” and ensure it is a legitimate coin.
But this design mechanism was improved with more privacy-focused cryptocurrencies. By adding another layer of encryption over the blockchain, coins likethe now-defunct Zclassic, obscured the wallet addresses and the transaction amount, while still maintaining the cryptographic integrity required to validate each transaction. Bitcoin Private seeks to apply the technology from Zclassic to the Bitcoin protocol.
Other Privacy Coins
A new privacy-focused cryptocurrency has been created and released recently, a fork from the first cryptocurrency Bitcoin.
ZcashandMonero are by far the two most popular privacy-focused cryptocurrencies.
They both mask the true wallet locations, transaction amounts and the receiver’s address, albeit doing so in slightly different ways (although following some transaction linkability research Monero has moved to Zcash’s RingCT method of obscuration, reducing differences further). The main difference comes down to the protocols used, and the mining technology required.
Monero has been implemented in multiple dark web marketplaces, which unquestionably increases the overall market price for the cryptocurrency. One may go as far as saying that if you have the option, you should in fact be using Monero as your cryptocurrency of choice for dark web marketplaces.
Zcash, however, has taken favour with Russian cybercrime syndicates and so-called “cryptolocking” malware purveyors. One malware infects the target device, the core disk is encrypted and only on payment of a set amount of Zcash would the criminals provide the decryption key to the target. Again, regardless of the nefarious nature, this increased the price of Zcash notably.
Where Does This Leave Bitcoin Private
In the end, it appears as though this is just another altcoin run by a few people with an idea—an idea to get wealthy, not to change the world.
Both Monero and Zcash have already got uses in the real world, regardless of the fact that these uses are “undesirable” or downright illegal.
Monero is at the heart ofcryptojackingand has been implemented into several dark web marketplaces. And Zcash has taken favor with cryptolocking malware spreaders. Theyhave a form of adoption, which is the next and most important phase of a cryptocurrency’s life.
Without adoption, the token or cryptocurrency will remain speculative forever, and eventually will be killed with the inevitable future market crashes.
It is early days and therefore impossible to know what will come of Bitcoin Private. However, Bitcoin Private appears to solve a prominent problem deep within Bitcoin’s center.
But in the strange and wonderful world of cryptocurrency, solving a problem or even having a brilliant whitepaper basically amounts to nothing. It is a mere spark. Whether there is enough accelerant around that spark to light a fire is a whole other conversation, one which cannot be had until more time has passed and until Bitcoin Private finds its form of adoption.
Darknet users are finding Bitcoin to be increasingly more vulnerable and risky than is useful and are now opting for other new alternatives.
According to recent reports, dark web users are dropping Bitcoin for new and emerging cryptocurrencies that are more difficult for authorities to track.
Despite it being quite tricky to trace and pin down actual criminal activities associated with digital currencies, there has been a substantial decline in the number of illegal transactions that involve Bitcoin.
What’s more, dark web users are increasingly monitoring other digital currencies such as Ethereum and Monero. What many users are learning about the reliance of Bitcoin to carry out transactions is that it’s as safe as it is risky.
Bitcoin operates on an exclusive public record known as the blockchain, where all the transactions are available online.
To get payments, one needs an address (public) but unfortunately for the users, this is how intelligence agencies can monitor how the funds are moving to addresses provided by hackers.
This way, they can arrest criminals while they’re attempting to withdraw through several more regulated platforms like banks or exchanges.
Over the last few years, there has been a splurge of new cryptocurrencies in addition to Bitcoin. These digital currencies have cropped up from the necessity for added privacy.
As opposed to Bitcoin’s now-vulnerable open transaction public record, the underlying Monero technology conceals the identities of the senders and receivers, not to mention the amount.
Given the relative stability of Ethereum and Monero over the course of last year, perhaps 2018 will see even more dark web users flocking to these alternative cryptocurrencies in the place of Bitcoin.
Just recently, CoinMarketCap’s Monero charts recorded a massive high of $400 in value, which is already a spike for the first week of 2018.
