Forgot your password?
typodupeerror
Crime Privacy

New 'Google' For the Dark Web Makes Buying Dope and Guns Easy 156

Posted by timothy
from the and-you'd-trust-this-because dept.
First time accepted submitter turkeydance (1266624) writes "The dark web just got a little less dark with the launch of a new search engine that lets you easily find illicit drugs and other contraband online. Grams, which launched last week and is patterned after Google, is accessible only through the Tor anonymizing browser (the address for Grams is: grams7enufi7jmdl.onion) but fills a niche for anyone seeking quick access to sites selling drugs, guns, stolen credit card numbers, counterfeit cash and fake IDs — sites that previously only could be found by users who knew the exact URL for the site."
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

New 'Google' For the Dark Web Makes Buying Dope and Guns Easy

Comments Filter:
  • by Anonymous Coward

    Remember back in the day when we had other search engines? Yeah, most of them were kinda terrible in comparison to Google. Every time I hear someone refer to their search engine as "Google for..." they've also been terrible. Google became king of search because they were so much better than everyone else.

    • by Anonymous Coward

      Google became king of search because they were so much better than everyone else.

      With emphasis on "were". Good luck searching for something without having them messing up you query with their "intelligent parsing". They should have a checkbox labeled "I know what I am looking for".

    • It's just that "Google" has become lazy shorthand for "search engine", that's all.

    • by Anonymous Coward
      It's a shame that they've ruined their search engine to the point that Bing is better.

      Besides, I had no problems using AltaVista or Hotbot.
  • by CrimsonAvenger (580665) on Saturday April 19, 2014 @07:49PM (#46797171)

    ...it'll let the Feds find them just as easily....

    Or does anyone seriously think the NSA can't use this service just as well as Random Internet Idiot?

    • ...it'll let the Feds find them just as easily....

      Or does anyone seriously think the NSA can't use this service just as well as Random Internet Idiot?

      Who says the NSA doesn't run the site [wikipedia.org]?

    • by Anonymous Coward

      1) If I'm someone who was into finding this illegal stuff, I surely would find my information somewhere other than Slashdot. (And slashdotters are typically smart enough to find their illegal stuff through less trackable means anyhow, if they were so inclined)

      2) If I'm not someone who is into finding illegal stuff (this is my correct category), I wouldn't click on this from Slashdot anyway.

      The only logical purpose for this link being on Slashdot is to popularize a site to collect data and/or lure people int

    • Re: (Score:2, Insightful)

      by Anonymous Coward

      After reading the submission, I would dare to think this is an attempt at entrapment by law enforcement, more then likely it's the Feds at work here.

      Not to be obvious, but Tor in my opinion is a complete failure, there seems to be so many holes in their system, that it too seems to be a decoy network for perhaps government spying, or it was a sincere network but is substitutable like every thing else on the internet.

      I think people forget just because you read a NSA memo targeting certain networks,

    • Well, as I seem unable to connect to them currently, I suspect they might already be having issues, whether due to Slashdotting/Streisanding or LE...
  • Must be the textual form of that secret masonic handshake. Of course, must keep the dope and guns among us brothers!
    • by Opyros (1153335)
      It's how they spell "Lets" in Llamedos.
      • by mt1955 (698912)

        ack -- posting to undo mod error

        • Re: (Score:3, Insightful)

          by davidwr (791652)

          ack -- posting to undo mod error

          Ah, you must've found the +1 solameitscool super-secret modification option that people with "6" Karma get to use if the computer throws a 20 on the roll of the dice when it give you mod points.

          Sorry you mis-used it, it will be awhile before you get another chance.

          • by mt1955 (698912)

            that is soooo close -- almost spot on -- how did you guess?

            actually, I wanted to rate it Funny and Coincidentally-I'm-Reading-Soul-Music-Riight-Now but I hit the the Overrated option instead -- the poster never deserved that so I had to post to undo it

            (note to self; never drink gin+Campari+Cointreau+lemon while moderating)

    • I'm starting to think the increasingly shitty summaries are some form of cry for help.

      Of course I haven't actually read the summary so I wouldn't know.

  • NSA, all the way (Score:1, Informative)

    by Anonymous Coward

    If people think the NSA isn't all over the dark web, they be dummies.

    • by mmell (832646) <mmell@hotmail.com> on Saturday April 19, 2014 @08:18PM (#46797291)
      what he said. While countermeasures can mediate the risk, you should assume that anything you send out electronically can be intercepted, decrypted and traced back to you. You can take steps to make this extremely difficult (hopefully more difficult than catching you is worth), you can certainly take steps I personally couldn't overcome without too much effort; but beating the intelligence gathering capabilities of one or more governments is at best an uncertain proposition (IMHO).
    • by Shakrai (717556) * on Sunday April 20, 2014 @12:26AM (#46798031) Journal

      If people think the NSA isn't all over the dark web, they be dummies.

      The NSA isn't that concerned with where you buy your pot. They aren't even that concerned with where the local gangbanger buys his guns, or where the local perv sources his kiddie porn.

      If you're going to wear the tin foil hat at least direct it at the appropriate three letter agencies: FBI, DEA, ATF, et. al.

      • by DriveDog (822962)
        The US government (stupid to lump it together, but saves me from having to list all the names of individuals) claims to have made communications between agencies a top priority and that it functions well. If we assume that's 90% wrong, then that leaves 10%, plenty, of cases where NSA passes stuff on to assorted agencies under the Justice or Treasury or State or Interior or Defense or Homeland Security Departments (which did I miss that should be included? Labor? Agriculture?). So, maybe splitting hairs, but
      • Except that the NSA has taken to giving data to the FBI, DEA, and ATF to prosecute people for these "smaller" crimes. Parallel Construction ring a bell?

        The NSA was cool when it was about national security. Now that it is "dirtying" itself with petty crime, it is not so cool.

  • Now the FBI and the Sheriff would be able to set up stings more efficiently. If they ever got around to learning how the tubes connecting the computers work.
    • by mysidia (191772)

      The real hidden service URL probably just changed.

      The site advert'd in the Slashdot article is probably itself a "Sting" operation to tag members of the public for the purpose of building a blacklist for the /real/ search site at some URL we don't know about.

      • Re:Good. (Score:5, Insightful)

        by duke_cheetah2003 (862933) on Saturday April 19, 2014 @09:41PM (#46797591) Homepage

        The real hidden service URL probably just changed.

        The site advert'd in the Slashdot article is probably itself a "Sting" operation to tag members of the public for the purpose
        of building a blacklist for the /real/ search site at some URL we don't know about.

        Yeah, I'm inclined to agree, that 'dark web' URL in slapped in such plain view.. screams honeypot. Pass.

        • Re:Good. (Score:5, Insightful)

          by AmiMoJo (196126) * <.ten.3dlrow. .ta. .ojom.> on Sunday April 20, 2014 @05:06AM (#46798465) Homepage

          The point of darknets is not to hide the URLs of services, it's to hide the location of the server and the clients connecting to it. Otherwise it would be kinda useless, since to use it you would have to have contact with other users which is risky.

          • ...Otherwise it would be kinda useless, since to use it you would have to have contact with other users which is risky.

            Which is also how one usually gets a hold of stuff in the real world. Depending on what is meant by "stuff", this might not be as risky as obtaining it online.

          • by mysidia (191772)

            Otherwise it would be kinda useless, since to use it you would have to have contact with other users which is risky.

            Because it's incredibly easy to distribute physical contraband without making contact with your users, or risking revealing your identity or your user's identity: in case either buyer or seller is actually a LEO or hired informant?

            • by AmiMoJo (196126) *

              Yes. Think about what you are saying for a moment. Silk Road ran for years with only a small number of users/sellers being caught. They went after the person running it instead, because the site community made it very difficult for LEAs to operate there. If it where any other way it would not have been so popular.

              Also, trying to rely on security through obscurity would be extremely dumb. The moment an LEA got the address the whole game would be up.

              • by mysidia (191772)

                Also, trying to rely on security through obscurity would be extremely dumb. The moment an LEA got the address the whole game would be up.

                Yes.... once their operation gets big or important enough... they are basically guaranteed that the feds will find out.

                Hell... the NSA are probably already surveilling any/all high traffic Tor nodes to locate IP addresses associated with "important" or "popular" nodes in the network, then surveil those, until they have mapped the topology of the Tor network; th

    • Re:Good. (Score:4, Insightful)

      by arth1 (260657) on Saturday April 19, 2014 @09:09PM (#46797477) Homepage Journal

      Now the FBI and the Sheriff would be able to set up stings more efficiently.

      FBI and the Sheriff? You have no real insight in how law enforcement works here in the US of A, do you?

      There are dozens(!) of different police forces, and they seldom cooperate on anything, but try to not step on each others' toes. A sheriff is county police and would not be involved in any international or interstate crime sting. Speeding tickets, serving divorce notices, arresting the busker in front of the strip mall, signing reports of items stolen, sit in cars at local road work - that's the sheriff's department. Investigative work to catch internet facilitated high crime is not going to involve the sheriff.

      • To be fair, the parent is probably some furriner who watched all of the Great John Wayne's movies. He should be praised for this and the ignorance he has acquired should be rewarded. It's the American way.

      • by KillDaBOB (206494)

        Yes, they seldom cooperate, but sometimes the higher ups do share some intelligence with the the lower departments. Have you missed the stories where a lower department was told "be at x place at y time, look for this person and get them for any small infraction of the law, then take them in and invoke any laws you can to get more information to as related to z reason." There have been stories like this on /. for quite a while. It has happened, it continues to happen. The smaller department will get you

  • by SeaFox (739806) on Saturday April 19, 2014 @09:08PM (#46797471)

    ...sites that previously only could be found by users who knew the exact URL for the site.

    Isn't that kinda how the Internet works. If your don't know the exact URL for a site and no one has posted a link to it on another site your do know, you're not going to reach it. It's only thanks to searching the indexing systems people can find stuff any other way.

    • by arth1 (260657)

      Not entirely true. I wrote a search engine of sorts once that in stage one ran DNS queries on dictionary words, and in stage two attempted to fetch / from ports 80 and 443. The results were indexed and searchable.
      Of course, the yield was pretty low, but still...

    • SeaFox, also if you use the search engine located at the link in this article, they all lead to yet another page where you are required to sign in. This is for each individual link that pops up when you do a topic search. Furthermore, all sign-in pages are identical. Seems this could be taken advantage of.
  • Its not hard in real life, and you have a better chance of not getting caught buying it.

  • Llaw enforcement will be lloving this new devellllopment, they'llll have yet another way to llook at the dark web.

  • Tor was created by the Naval Research Lab; Tor was created by the United States Government. Should we believe what we are told about it's invincibility. I've read personal opinions online that basically say that even though it was created by the Navy, they were doing it for themselves and made it really unbreakable. With all events being taken into account, during the past months, I am not so sure I really trust anything concerning government any longer. A program like TrueCrypt is more safe feeling to me
  • ... there wasn't any search engine for TOR?

    How were the Chinese dissidents supposed to find the tor-based hidden services on how to combat the Chinese government? After all, that's why the US Government invented TOR, right? Right???

    • by Anonymous Coward

      Just because there wasn't a search engine didn't mean there wasn't a directory.

  • Buying guns? (Score:4, Insightful)

    by MasseKid (1294554) on Saturday April 19, 2014 @11:31PM (#46797899)
    Buying guns is perfectly legal. gunbroker.com, budsgunshop.com, walmart.com. Well, to be fair the last one tells you they are instore only, but the others will gladly and legally ship straight to your FFL.
    • by luther349 (645380)
      buying legal guns is perfectly legal. pretty sure that's not the type of guns they where talking about. more likely felines who lost that right or full auto guns.
  • In the United States you have a right, and a duty to train and learn how to use firearms effectively.

    If you don't, your government will, or someone else will and you won't like it.

    HIstory says so.

    Readng a little about why the Constitution was written like it was, and why people thought that way is a lesson every American should learn.

    Otherwise we as a nation will repeat the those same mistakes.

    • by Noishkel (3464121)
      Well some of the ones listed in the link are. Or near enough to make no never mind. Pity thought because I'd be aallll over that Skorpion...
    • by HuguesT (84078)

      OK, so the US government has been recently shown conclusively to lie and spy on its own citizens, not to mention sending them to die on useless faraway wars, overtaxing them and maintaining a worrisome inequality regime for the benefit of only a few rich citizen. Clearly the US gov seems to be evil. Where are the righteous citizens taking up arms and bringing down that evil government?

      Which well-armed milicia do you belong to?

      • Which well-armed milicia do you belong to?

        The same one all the rest of the US citizens belong to. Read the Militia Act sometime.

      • by luther349 (645380)
        if they did that there entitlement checks wont show up anymore. how do you think oboma got to stay in office welfare and entitlement..
    • In the United States you have a right, and a duty to train and learn how to use firearms effectively.

      Well, if D&N taught me anything it's that throwing all your experience into one specialzation is folly. Civilian firearms are literally kids play. I looked at the export controll list, then became a crypographer.

    • by luther349 (645380)
      pretty sure these are not the guns they are talking about. felons buying them black market ones that are unregistered and full autos.
  • True forward anonymity is a useful thing and it served the myriad dissidents escaping opression which is good. Being involved in it also meant facilitating the use of others involved in slavery, abuse of minors, and so on. On balance I decided that I could not justify facilitating the downside, no matter how important the upside was. There has to be a better way than dancing with the devil. If you dance with the devil, you will pay his fee.
  • I typed Britney Spears and got only two results. Fail! I've had better luck with Pirate Bay.

  • hold on a second while I give my name and address to an internet drug dealer. no possible way he's a fed or anything.

No amount of careful planning will ever replace dumb luck.

Working...