Hubbry Logo
Dream MarketDream MarketMain
Open search
Dream Market
Community hub
Dream Market
logo
7 pages, 0 posts
0 subscribers
Be the first to start a discussion here.
Be the first to start a discussion here.
Dream Market
Dream Market
Dream Market
View on Wikipedia
from Wikipedia

Dream Market was an online darknet market founded in late 2013.[2] Dream Market operated on a hidden service of the Tor network, allowing online users to browse anonymously and securely while avoiding potential monitoring of traffic. The marketplace sold a variety of content, including drugs, stolen data, and counterfeit consumer goods, all using cryptocurrency. Dream provided an escrow service, with disputes handled by staff. The market also had accompanying forums, hosted on a different URL, where buyers, vendors, and other members of the community could interact. It was one of the longest running darknet markets.

Key Information

Administrator and prolific vendor Gal Vallerius was arrested in August 2017. The site shut down on April 30, 2019.

History

[edit]

Following the seizures and shutdowns of the AlphaBay and Hansa markets in July 2017 as part of Operation Bayonet, there was much speculation that Dream Market would become the predominant darknet marketplace. Formerly, Dream Market had been considered the second-largest darknet marketplace, with AlphaBay being the largest and Hansa the third-largest. Many vendors and buyers from AlphaBay and Hansa communities registered on Dream Market in the aftermath of Operation Bayonet. Rumors at the time suggested that Dream Market was under law enforcement control.[3][4]

At the time, Dream Market was reported to have "57,000 listings for drugs and 4,000 listings for opioids".[5]

Dream Market administrator and prolific vendor Gal Vallerius was arrested in August 2017, after a border search of his laptop confirmed his identity as online drug dealer OxyMonster.[6] The equivalent of US$500,000 in the cryptocurrency Bitcoin was also discovered on this device. Vallerius is the subject of an ongoing investigation regarding large online narcotics purchases which began in February 2016.[7]

On March 24, 2019, a banner was added to the Dream Market site announcing its shutdown on April 30, 2019, with the addition that it "is transferring its services to a partner company" followed by an .onion link. Some users believe this to be the owner's reaction to ongoing distributed denial-of-service attacks while others doubt the credibility of the message and suspect a connection to law enforcement, scammers or competing marketplaces.[8]

Security issues

[edit]

Shortly after the recent seizures of other markets, the accounts of a number of Dream Market vendors came under the control of Dutch law enforcement.[9] Since no official statement has been released by Dutch authorities regarding this matter, it is unclear how these accounts were compromised, though some researchers suggest that shared credentials are to blame.[citation needed]

On September 13, 2017, Dream users reported the loss of funds from their accounts in posts to forums such as Reddit. In a post to the market's news page, staff later confirmed that a hard drive loss caused the issue and promised to refund the lost funds.[10]

See also

[edit]

References

[edit]

See also

[edit]
Revisions and contributorsEdit on WikipediaRead on Wikipedia

Dream Market

View on Grokipedia
from Grokipedia

Dream Market was a darknet marketplace operating on the Tor network from November 2013 to April 2019, enabling anonymous transactions for primarily illegal drugs, digital goods, and contraband using cryptocurrencies such as Bitcoin. It featured escrow services for buyer protection, two-factor authentication, and vendor verification to build trust among users. The platform expanded significantly after the 2017 law enforcement seizures of larger markets like and Hansa, attracting displaced vendors and listings. By late 2018, Dream Market hosted nearly 10,000 vendors, over 1.9 million total items, and approximately 170,000 active listings, with monthly sales averaging $14 million. Drugs constituted about 50% of offerings, followed by digital products like hacked accounts and e-books at 40%. Dream Market concluded operations voluntarily on April 30, 2019, following months of disruptive DDoS attacks and a $400,000 demand, amid heightened scrutiny from arrests of associated vendors by agencies including the FBI. Its shutdown highlighted the precarious balance of , economic incentives, and external pressures in ecosystems, with operators citing sustainability challenges over direct seizure.

History

Founding and Initial Development (2013–2016)

Dream Market was established as a darknet marketplace on November 15, 2013, operating as a hidden service on the Tor network to enable anonymous browsing and transactions primarily for illicit goods such as drugs, stolen data, and hacking services. Its launch occurred shortly after the FBI's shutdown of Silk Road in October 2013, filling a void in the ecosystem of online black markets and attracting vendors and users displaced from the predecessor platform. The anonymous operators emphasized reliability and user protections from inception, distinguishing it from earlier, more rudimentary forums by incorporating vendor verification processes and basic dispute resolution mechanisms. In its formative phase through 2014, Dream Market focused on building a core user base by supporting payments and offering an system to mitigate scam risks, which fostered trust in an environment rife with exit scams and pressures. Listings grew steadily as vendors migrated from defunct sites, with the platform prioritizing drug categories—accounting for the majority of sales—while also accommodating like counterfeit documents and . By mid-2015, it had solidified its position among surviving markets, benefiting from the fragmented competition following multiple closures, though exact user or revenue figures from this period remain opaque due to the pseudonymous nature of operations. Through 2016, Dream Market underwent incremental enhancements to its interface and protocols, including improved search functionalities and listing categorization, which supported moderate expansion amid broader drug sales estimated at 170–300 million USD annually across platforms. The site maintained a low-profile approach, avoiding aggressive to evade detection, and reported no major disruptions during this interval, allowing it to mature into a stable alternative as newer entrants like emerged. This period marked the transition from nascent setup to operational resilience, setting the stage for later dominance without publicized leadership changes or internal conflicts.

Expansion Amid Market Disruptions (2017–2018)

In July 2017, international law enforcement operations, notably Operation Bayonet led by the FBI and Dutch National Police, resulted in the shutdown of AlphaBay on July 5 and the covert takeover of Hansa (seized on June 20 but operated undercover until July). These disruptions, which had dominated the darknet market landscape with millions in transactions, created a vacuum that prompted vendors and users to migrate to surviving platforms. Dream Market, operational since 2013, emerged as a primary beneficiary, attracting displaced participants seeking continuity in illicit trade. Post-shutdown, Dream Market experienced rapid user growth, with daily new registrations surging from approximately 20 users before July 2017 to around 200 thereafter. This influx nearly doubled its user base to about 20,000 within nine months, aligning precisely with the timing of and Hansa closures. Vendor migration was substantial, as analyses of forum posts and account creations identified patterns of and Hansa sellers relocating to Dream Market, often retaining similar pseudonyms and product listings to rebuild operations. The platform's established reputation for multisig and vendor verification facilitated this shift, though some users expressed caution due to fears of undercover monitoring similar to Hansa's fate. Throughout 2018, Dream Market sustained this expansion amid ongoing market fragmentation, with studies of activity across platforms like Dream, TradeRoute, Berlusconi, and confirming its dominance in listings for drugs and other contraband. Transaction volumes recovered toward pre-disruption levels industry-wide, but Dream's user and retention highlighted its resilience, even as newer entrants like Empire Market began competing for the vacuum. This period underscored the adaptive nature of ecosystems, where enforcement actions against leaders inadvertently bolstered secondary markets through network effects and portability.

Final Operations and Shutdown (2019)

In early 2019, Dream Market experienced severe disruptions from sustained distributed denial-of-service (DDoS) attacks, which had persisted for over a year and necessitated the use of more than 600 mirror links to maintain accessibility. These attacks intensified in the weeks leading up to , rendering the site intermittently unavailable and halting all buying and selling activities. Administrators attributed the onslaught to an scheme by a single actor demanding a $400,000 ransom in , which they refused to pay. On March 26, 2019, site administrators posted a announcing the market's closure effective April 30, 2019, stating it would transfer services to a partner company at a new address. The announcement prohibited new account creations and emphasized an orderly wind-down, allowing existing users to finalize transactions amid the ongoing downtime. This decision followed concurrent actions against competitors, such as the arrest of Market operators, which heightened operational risks across platforms. The shutdown was characterized as voluntary, driven primarily by the unsustainable costs and unreliability imposed by the DDoS campaign rather than direct by authorities. Europol's assessment noted that Dream Market's moderators faced extortion demands of USD 400,000 amid these attacks, contributing to the platform's inability to recover. Post-announcement, communities speculated on potential migrations or scams, but no verified successor emerged from the stated partner, marking the effective end of Dream Market's operations after nearly six years.

Technical and Operational Features

Infrastructure and Accessibility

Dream Market operated exclusively as a hidden service on the Tor network, leveraging onion routing to anonymize server locations and user IP addresses, thereby obfuscating the physical infrastructure from external detection. This setup relied on Tor's layered encryption and rendezvous points, where the service's descriptor was published to the directory authorities without revealing hosting details, a standard for darknet markets to evade law enforcement tracing. Specific server hosting configurations remained undisclosed, consistent with operational security practices that prioritized decentralization and obfuscation over centralized cloud or VPS providers vulnerable to subpoenas. Accessibility was restricted to users equipped with Tor-compatible browsers, such as the official Tor Browser or alternatives supporting for redundancy, requiring entry of the market's .onion address—e.g., eajwlvm3z2lcca76.onion or xsuee6v24g2q6phb.onion during active periods—to reach the site. Addresses were periodically rotated, as evidenced by a shift to a new .onion following DDoS disruptions in early 2019, to maintain uptime amid attacks that demanded ransoms up to $400,000. Open registration facilitated entry for technically proficient individuals, though basic knowledge of navigation, wallets, and PGP encryption was essential for secure participation, with the platform enforcing PGP-based two-factor authentication for logins and withdrawals via PIN codes. This barrier filtered out novices, contributing to a user base of approximately 200,000 accounts by 2018, while and rating systems further streamlined transactions once accessed.

Transaction and Escrow Mechanisms

Dream Market facilitated transactions primarily through (BTC), the dominant on markets during its operation, with buyers required to deposit funds into market-controlled wallets before purchasing. Upon order placement, these deposits were transferred internally via a private ledger to an account managed by the platform, shielding the process from direct visibility to enhance user . This internal handling meant no observable transactions occurred between order initiation and buyer confirmation, with deposits typically directed to distinct addresses (e.g., initial deposit address B1) separate from vendor payout addresses (e.g., B2 or B4). The escrow mechanism served as the default safeguard against fraud, holding vendor payments until the buyer confirmed receipt of goods, at which point funds were released through untraceable internal transfers or mixing services. Buyers could opt for "Finalize Early" (FE), releasing escrowed funds to the vendor prior to delivery to expedite processing, though this carried higher scam risk and was recommended only for vendors with established positive ratings (1-5 stars based on prior feedback). While primarily Bitcoin-based, Dream Market later incorporated (BCH) as an additional payment option alongside BTC. Transaction fees included market commissions deducted from escrowed amounts, alongside inherent blockchain costs for deposits and withdrawals, though specifics varied by volume and network conditions. The system's reliance on and vendor ratings aimed to mitigate uncertainty in anonymous trades, but vulnerabilities persisted, as evidenced by user reports of fund discrepancies during outages.

Vendor and Product Management

Vendors on Dream Market were required to establish profiles and post listings for products, which included detailed descriptions, pricing in (primarily ), shipping origins and destinations, and accepted payment methods. Listings encompassed a wide range of categories, with drugs comprising the majority—such as , , and benzodiazepines—alongside digital goods like e-books, guides, and stolen data; analyses identified up to 131,000 products across approximately 2,089 vendors, with over 1.9 million items tracked in one spanning late 2018 to early 2019. Product pages displayed vendor identifiers, transaction details, and options for or finalize-early transactions, where buyers could release funds prior to delivery for established sellers. The platform enforced vendor accountability through a bond requirement of 0.1 BTC (equivalent to roughly $375 at prevailing rates) to deter scams and ensure commitment, alongside mandatory PGP for communications and a 4% commission on sales deducted by administrators. New vendors underwent vetting processes to filter low-quality entrants, contributing to high average positive feedback scores that reflected and product reliability; however, vendor turnover remained elevated, with an average lifespan of about 80 days, though top performers—handling tens of thousands of transactions—dominated and stabilized operations. Buyer-vendor interactions centered on a feedback system assigning 1- to 5-star ratings with textual comments, aggregating into overall vendor scores that buyers used to gauge trustworthiness and separate reputable sellers from unreliable ones; over 92,000 reviews were recorded in one eight-month period ending January 2019. Escrow was integral to most listings (covering 85% of items and 83% of offerings in sampled ), holding buyer funds until shipment to mitigate risks, with non-escrow options limited to high-trust scenarios. This structure fostered a localized network where a small cadre of specialized vendors accounted for disproportionate sales volume, emphasizing empirical performance metrics over unverified claims.

Security Measures and Vulnerabilities

Implemented Protections

Dream Market employed several security mechanisms to safeguard user accounts and transactions, primarily leveraging cryptographic tools and procedural safeguards common to marketplaces. Account access required two-factor authentication (2FA), combining a standard password with (PGP) key verification, where users decrypted an encrypted challenge message using their private PGP key upon login. This PGP-based 2FA aimed to prevent unauthorized access even if passwords were compromised, as the private key remained under user control. Additionally, withdrawal PIN codes were mandated for releasing funds from user wallets, adding a layer of protection against account hijacking by requiring a separate, user-set numeric code for extractions. Transaction security centered on an system, where buyer payments in were held by the market administrators until the vendor confirmed shipment and the buyer verified receipt, reducing risks of non-delivery scams. PGP encryption was enforced for all private communications between buyers and vendors, ensuring messages could not be intercepted or read without the recipient's private key, thereby mitigating eavesdropping on sensitive details like shipping addresses. For , the platform provided a reporting mechanism allowing buyers to flag vendor issues such as non-delivery or , prompting administrative review and potential vendor penalties, including bans or fund forfeiture. These measures, while enhancing trust relative to decentralized or non-escrow alternatives, relied on centralized administration, introducing potential single points of failure despite the use of Tor for and basic protocols. Dream Market also permitted "finalize early" options for established vendors, releasing escrow funds prematurely upon buyer agreement, which prioritized speed over full protection and was intended for low-risk, repeat transactions.

Major Incidents and Attacks

Dream Market experienced multiple distributed denial-of-service (DDoS) attacks that disrupted its operations, with notable incidents occurring in 2017 and intensifying in 2019. In October 2017, the marketplace faced unexplained cyberattacks alongside other sites, including Wall Street Market, rendering Dream Market inaccessible and displaying error messages to users. These attacks sowed chaos across platforms but did not lead to permanent closure at the time. The most severe disruptions came from prolonged DDoS campaigns in early , which administrators attributed to extortion attempts demanding a $400,000 . These attacks overwhelmed the site's infrastructure, halting trading for extended periods—over seven weeks continuously before a full suspension—and necessitated the creation of more than 600 mirror links to maintain access. The sustained pressure contributed directly to the site's announced shutdown on April 30, , with operators citing the unmanageable cost and frequency of the assaults as the primary reason, while permitting users a final period for fund withdrawals. A significant operational blow occurred in August 2017 with the arrest of Gal Vallerius, a French national operating under the pseudonym , who served as a senior moderator and prolific vendor on the platform. Vallerius was apprehended at Atlanta's international airport en route to a world beard and mustache competition, carrying cash and linked to narcotics sales exceeding $8 million in value. He pleaded guilty in June 2018 to conspiracy to distribute controlled substances and , receiving a 20-year sentence in October 2018. His capture highlighted vulnerabilities in vendor oversight but did not immediately compromise the site's core infrastructure. While no verified large-scale hacks or data breaches directly targeted Dream Market's user base or escrow systems, the 2019 DDoS events fueled speculation of underlying involvement or compromise, though administrators denied such claims and no official seizure was confirmed. These incidents underscored the precarious environment of markets, where competitive rivals, extortionists, and authorities exploited technical weaknesses without needing full infiltration.

Controversies and Debates

Law Enforcement Interventions

Law enforcement efforts against Dream Market primarily targeted vendors and users rather than the marketplace infrastructure itself, contributing to its voluntary shutdown announcement on March 27, 2019. Unlike prior darknet markets such as or , which were seized directly by authorities, Dream Market's operators ceased operations without confirmed arrests of administrators, citing an intent to transition users to a successor platform by April 30, 2019. However, the timing aligned with intensified international actions, including arrests of prominent vendors, which disrupted operations and likely influenced the decision. A key intervention was Operation SaboTor, a coordinated effort by the Joint Criminal Opioid Darknet Enforcement (J-CODE) team, involving the FBI, , and agencies from , , , and other nations. Launched as an eight-month investigation, it culminated in announcements on March 26, 2019, resulting in 61 arrests across multiple countries for darknet drug trafficking. Authorities shut down 50 vendor accounts, seized over 299 kilograms of drugs (including opioids), 51 firearms, and more than $7 million in cryptocurrency, cash, and gold. Specifically targeting Dream Market, the operation apprehended five members of the "drugpharmacist" group, accused of distributing methamphetamine, heroin, cocaine, and crack cocaine via the platform, often concealed in stuffed animals. Concurrently, the District Attorney's office dismantled the "sinmed" vendor operation, one of Dream Market's top sellers in the upper 3% by transaction volume. On April 4, 2019, three individuals—Ronald MacCarty, Chester Arthur, and Jarrette Codd—were arrested on charges of conspiracy, , criminal sale of controlled substances, and . Operating under the alias "Next Level Research and Development" since July 2016, sinmed shipped over 1,000 packages of (420,000–620,000 tablets), fentanyl-laced (500 glassines), and other drugs to 43 U.S. states, laundering approximately $2.3 million in . The probe originated in 2017 from suspicious ATM withdrawals of over $1 million in $700 increments, traced through analysis and financial patterns. These vendor-focused disruptions highlighted vulnerabilities in Dream Market's , as arrests eroded trust and supply chains without requiring site seizure. No evidence emerged of server takedowns or operator captures, but the cumulative pressure from such actions, including tracing and undercover purchases, underscored evolving tactics emphasizing peripheral ecosystem dismantlement over direct interventions.

Ethical Perspectives: Libertarian Defenses vs. Prohibitionist Critiques

Libertarian advocates view darknet markets like Dream Market as embodiments of voluntary, consensual exchange, where individuals exercise autonomy in acquiring substances without state interference, aligning with philosophical traditions emphasizing non-aggression and . Proponents, echoing arguments from earlier platforms such as , contend that itself generates greater harms—including product adulteration, gang violence, and enforcement costs—than regulated or unregulated markets, with cryptomarkets mitigating these through mechanisms like user reviews and systems that enhance transparency and . Empirical analyses indicate that online drug vendors often disseminate advice, such as dosage guidelines and purity testing recommendations, potentially reducing overdose incidents compared to opaque street transactions. Such defenses extend to critiques of prohibitionist policies as paternalistic failures, citing data from the ongoing U.S. opioid crisis where dynamics, driven by legal restrictions, have amplified contamination and dealer unpredictability; libertarians argue that decentralized platforms foster competition, incentivizing vendors to prioritize customer safety to maintain ratings and repeat business. This perspective prioritizes individual liberty over collective moral impositions, positing that adults bear responsibility for their choices, and that market signals—evident in Dream Market's longevity from to —demonstrate organic demand unwarped by coercive alternatives. Prohibitionist critiques, often advanced by law enforcement and authorities, frame markets as accelerators of societal decay, enabling scalable distribution of addictive and lethal substances that impose externalities like healthcare burdens, family disruptions, and spillover onto non-users. Critics highlight Dream Market's role in facilitating sales of high-risk opioids and synthetics, arguing that lowers for inexperienced users and exploits vulnerabilities such as , with platform data from 2019 shutdowns revealing millions in transactions tied to substances linked to rising overdose deaths. From a standpoint, these markets are condemned for commodifying human frailty, profiting from predictable patterns of dependency that undermine personal agency and communal welfare, irrespective of claims—echoing longstanding ethical objections to trades as erosive of and social cohesion. Government and international reports underscore how such platforms integrate with broader , laundering proceeds through cryptocurrencies and evading quality controls that regulated systems could enforce, thereby amplifying public risks like contaminated shipments crossing borders. While acknowledging enforcement challenges, prohibitionists maintain that ethical imperatives demand suppression of these venues to protect vulnerable populations, including youth accessing via Tor, and to deter normalization of illicit economies that correlate with elevated violence and health crises in empirical studies of darknet-facilitated trafficking. This view critiques libertarian individualism as shortsighted, prioritizing aggregate harms over abstract freedoms, with sources like emphasizing the transnational threat posed by markets like Dream Market to rule-of-law frameworks.

Impact and Legacy

Effects on Darknet Ecosystems

Dream Market's rise following the July 2017 shutdowns of and Hansa positioned it as a central hub in the ecosystem, absorbing a significant influx of users and listings, which resulted in an abnormal spike in its activity levels. This migration underscored the ecosystem's adaptability, with Dream becoming one of the largest markets by volume, facilitating millions in weekly transactions across hundreds of thousands of listings primarily for illicit drugs and other goods. The market's announced closure on April 30, 2019, amid persistent DDoS attacks demanding a $400,000 , triggered immediate user displacements but only temporary disruptions to overall trading volumes, which typically recover within 3 to 9 days post-closure. High-activity users, handling transaction volumes of approximately $3,883, migrated rapidly to surviving platforms, while about 66% of users shifted to the largest coexisting markets, such as Wall Street Market, which experienced surges of 100,000 new users daily and exceeded 1 million registered customers in the aftermath. This event highlighted the 's resilience, as evidenced by steady total weekly trading volume growth from to despite multiple high-profile closures, maintaining around 38 active markets by mid-. Dream's shutdown contributed to an emerging pattern of voluntary retirements among major operators, driven by escalating risks from operations, cyber extortion, and challenges in laundering proceeds amid improved analytics. Consequently, the reorganized through relocations and forum-based networking on platforms like Telegram, fostering short-term fragmentation but no long-term contraction in illicit online .

Societal and Policy Implications

The operation and shutdown of Dream Market highlighted the limited but persistent role of marketplaces in facilitating illicit distribution, which accounted for approximately 0.12% of the combined global retail drug market share among its four largest peers in 2018. While enabling anonymous transactions via cryptocurrencies and Tor, such platforms potentially exacerbated risks by broadening access to substances like opioids and , though empirical evidence indicates their overall contribution to overdose rates remained marginal compared to and street sources. Vendor review systems on Dream Market introduced elements of absent in traditional black markets, arguably reducing adulteration risks for some users, yet this did not offset the inherent dangers of unregulated potency and lack of medical oversight. The voluntary closure of Dream Market on April 30, 2019, triggered short-term displacements, including a temporary surge in street-level drug activity as vendors and buyers migrated to alternatives, with effects dissipating within months as new markets absorbed the volume. This pattern underscored the adaptive nature of online illicit economies, where takedowns disrupt supply chains briefly—particularly for high-risk opioids like —but fail to suppress overall availability, as listings proliferated across successors like Wall Street Market and emerging platforms post-2019. Societally, such resilience perpetuated a cycle of enforcement-driven innovation, sustaining low-barrier entry for novice vendors while complicating efforts, as displaced trade reverted to higher-risk offline modalities without or feedback mechanisms. Policy-wise, Dream Market's prominence spurred enhanced international collaboration, exemplified by operations targeting cryptocurrency flows and vendor migrations, yet analyses reveal that shutdown strategies implicitly shape but do not dismantle the ecosystem, often leading to fragmentation rather than eradication. Governments responded with tightened regulations on virtual assets and monitoring tools, but the platform's exit highlighted prohibition's causal limitations: demand persistence drives market rebirth, suggesting that enforcement alone yields without addressing root factors like treatment or alternatives. Critics from enforcement perspectives argue for escalated tech interventions to trace transactions, while empirical reviews caution that such measures risk broader privacy erosions without proportionally curtailing harms, as volumes represent a of total illicit flows dominated by conventional trafficking.

References

  1. https://www.euda.europa.eu/data/repository/data-lifetime-and-reason-closure-global-darknet-markets-offering-drugs_en
  2. https://scholarworks.indianapolis.iu.edu/bitstream/1805/24715/1/Carr_2019_into.pdf
  3. https://gwern.net/doc/darknet-market/2020-zhou-2.pdf
  4. https://www.hackthebox.com/blog/dark-web-markets
  5. https://arxiv.org/pdf/1911.09536
  6. https://pure.tudelft.nl/ws/files/46185682/Wegberg_Verburgh_Lost_in_the_Dream.pdf
  7. https://www.bbc.com/news/technology-40788266
  8. https://www.euda.europa.eu/drugs-library/analysis-supply-drugs-and-new-psychoactive-substances-europe-based-vendors-darknet-markets-2017-18_en
  9. https://bitcoinmagazine.com/culture/it-looks-if-another-darknet-market-era-coming-end
  10. https://www.darkowl.com/blog-content/darknet-whackamole/
  11. https://www.vice.com/en/article/dark-web-net-dream-market-closed-theories/
  12. https://www.coveware.com/blog/dream-market-take-down-causes-ransomware-communication-chaos
  13. https://www.elliptic.co/blog/why-are-the-operators-of-billion-dollar-darknet-markets-retiring
  14. https://cyberscoop.com/dream-market-shut-down/
  15. https://www.infosecurity-magazine.com/news/so-long-farewell-dream-market-says-1/
  16. https://finance.yahoo.com/news/dream-market-shuts-down-dea-221550709.html
  17. https://www.abc.net.au/news/2019-04-28/dark-net-markets-closing-users-wonder-what-comes-next/11043422
  18. https://www.europol.europa.eu/sites/default/files/documents/iocta_2019.pdf
  19. https://www.darkowl.com/blog-content/darknet-reacts-to-dream-market-announcement/
  20. https://www.trendmicro.com/en_us/what-is/dark-web.html
  21. https://www.europol.europa.eu/sites/default/files/documents/drugs_and_the_darknet_-_td0417834enn.pdf
  22. https://www.trmlabs.com/resources/blog/darknet-markets-explained
  23. https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC8452499/
  24. https://scholarworks.gsu.edu/bitstreams/42a729a5-e5dd-41b9-b6c7-faee38157dc7/download
  25. https://research.tue.nl/files/142684905/Rene_Wouters_Thesis_FINAL.pdf
  26. https://apps.dtic.mil/sti/trecms/pdf/AD1114715.pdf
  27. https://www.darknetstats.com/dream-market/
  28. https://www.researchgate.net/publication/339479988_Into_the_Reverie_Exploration_of_the_Dream_Market
  29. https://cyberscoop.com/dark-web-ddos-attacks-dream-market-wall-street-market/
  30. https://www.justice.gov/archives/opa/pr/dark-web-administrator-sentenced-20-years-prison-narcotics-trafficking-and-money-laundering
  31. https://www.dea.gov/press-releases/2018/06/12/dark-web-vendor-pleads-guilty-narcotics-trafficking-and-money-laundering
  32. https://www.fbi.gov/news/stories/j-code-operation-sabotor-032619
  33. https://www.europol.europa.eu/newsroom/news/global-law-enforcement-action-against-vendors-and-buyers-dark-web
  34. https://www.wired.com/story/sinmed-dark-web-manattan-district-attorney-atm-withdrawals/
  35. https://www.wired.com/2015/04/silk-road-1/
  36. https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC5947707/
  37. https://www.swansea.ac.uk/media/The-Rise-and-Challenge-of-Dark-Net-Drug-Markets.pdf
  38. https://reason.com/2016/02/01/freedom-in-the-dark/
  39. https://www.justice.gov/archives/opa/pr/justice-department-investigation-leads-shutdown-largest-online-darknet-marketplace
  40. https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/10.1177/1057567717709498
  41. https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC6900283/
  42. https://www.nature.com/articles/s41598-020-74416-y
  43. https://www.unodc.org/documents/Focus/WDR20_Booklet_4_Darknet_web.pdf
  44. https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0167268122002827
  45. https://www.aic.gov.au/sites/default/files/2021-02/rr18_impact_of_darknet_market_seizures_on_opioid_availability.pdf
  46. https://www.aic.gov.au/media-centre/news/new-research-reveals-impact-darknet-market-seizures-opioid-availability
  47. https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/1745-9133.12647
Add your contribution
Related Hubs
User Avatar
No comments yet.