News Feed
  • DrugHub has agreed to fully refund all users who lost money in the SuperMarket exit scam.  
  • Retro Market has gone offline. Circumstances of the closure unknown.  
  • SuperMarket has closed following an exit scam by one of the admins.  
  • The admin of Incognito Market, Pharoah, has been arrested by the FBI several months after exit scamming.  
  • Silk RoadTorhoo mini logo
  • darknet markets list
  • Popular P2P exchange LocalMonero has announced it is closing.  

HELP me figure out how I was FLAGGED : OpSec | Torhoo darknet markets

So whether it was the best way to do things or not is not what I want to discuss, but I would buy bitcoin using different services and then send said bitcoin to my Exodus wallet. I would then convert my BTC to XMR. I would then send said XMR to my arch wallet. I did this numerous times with no issue. With that being said I didn't make deals often and when I did they were small so maybe that's why I didn't put the effort into finding different ways, like I said that's not what I Want to discuss. But again I did this method repeatedly with absolutely no issue. As soon as ARCH gets taken down a day or 2 later I try that same method. When I go to swap to XMR it alerts me that it is failed and I need to contact the support team. I contact said support team and they say my transaction has been flagged and I need to complete certain KYC tasks in order to get my coin back. Yes, i'm smart enough to know not to take part in ANY KYC requests so I just chalked it up as a loss. A week later I get a updated message saying they reviewed my case and my transaction is "subject to a refund". Also stated that after said refund they would "terminate services and blacklist all the addresses associated with my transaction". They say they can "to refund your transaction we incur operating costs that will be recovered from my refund due to my misuse of their services."

Now here is the part where I would love some feedback. How does something like this happen? I made a post weeks ago stating that I personally questioned whether after the take down of Arch LEO were able to a identify certain wallet deposit addresses within the market. I then questioned if LEO were able to identify the deposit addresses then were they able to determine where said deposits were coming from and "flag" them in some sort of way to block me from making further crypto swaps/deposits. I don't think it's a coincidence that this occured mere hours after the announcement of the Arch take down seeing as I NEVER had any issue remotely close to anything like this before.

What do you think? Was this just a mere coincidence? Is the timing just a fluke? Or are the take down and me being flagged connected? If they are connected, how did it happen?

I'm no genius but I do follow basic OPSEC and have been on and off dabbling in the DNM realm for quite some time. I always encrypt, I always follow the rules i've been made aware of. I'd appreciate it if genuine feedback was given and for this post to not be a opportunity to shame me or lecture me on my shortcomings, but educate me. CHeers
The explanation is relative simple actually. The way they would have known your transaction is what they would categorize as criminal or high AML risk would be due to Archetyps XMR addresses.

Something I noticed way back when Archetyp started to do pre generated public XMR addresses and recently speculated as one of identification ways for the market itself

/post/c1bd63360d2e7754a40d/#c-b6b4d6829eb4636086

2) On payments everyone knew they did a not so clever way to protect against phishing attacks by pre computing XMR addresses. Public ones nonetheless. Sub addresses exist for a reason. No one had ever called them out on it the first comment I ever seen criticizing this was by /u/CodeIsLaw /post/7009b2d9029d2e4601a8/#c-cce802eae978c18784

I do believe it is some precedent to observe such mistakes aren't repeated or encouraged by upcoming or superlist markets /u/Paris /u/HugBunter.

Markets shouldn't be sacrificing security or privacy for anti phishing functionality (non effective too) like Archetyp did with pre generated public Monero addresses. Despite what some markets falsely claim only for marketing, phishing isn't going away and you can only mitigate and minimize but not eliminate fully at this stage. Putting users at risk shouldn't come to a cost to everyone only because several users aren't diligent enough to protect themselves.

If that wasn't enough it could be possible the way you obtained your bitcoin had been flagged. Because it works today doesn't guarantee tomorrow it won't be flagged (concerning non-privacy coins). Crypto AML percentages explained and ranked /post/fa2baaa8344d156cccc4
/u/VendorSchreck
1 points
3 weeks ago
I agree, it would be better to not use pre generated XMR addresses, as it causes more harm than benefit.
But it's not that much of a big deal, as it only applies to people that use weird wallets and not the ones that use the official wallet or Feather or those that directly transfer to the market. It's mostly the end user's fault for not using a proper wallet.
It's a big deal because exchangers can see the Monero going to addresses starting with the same letters and numbers used by a darknet marketplace. Sub addresses were created for a reason. Anyone interested should referred to the Janus attack and Breaking Monero series.
/u/VendorSchreck
1 points
3 weeks ago
You also shouldn't transfer from an exchange directly to a market. This was also part of my comment above. If you use a proper wallet and don't directly transfer from an exchange or swap service, but from your decent wallet, this does not affect you. It only affects people that do mistakes, therefore not such a big deal as it can be avoided by correctly using your XMR wallet software, it only affects those that don't.
It's more clear now as previously your comment were mentioning about official wallets and not intermediary wallets. I agree with you people should use intermediary XMR wallet as it's a simple step but increases privacy.
/u/VendorSchreck
1 points
3 weeks ago
Yeah, I also got a talent to overread stuff.
But overall you got a fair point and it would be better without pregenerated addresses, but I just don't think it's that dramatic, that's my view about it.
/u/kobaflop
1 points
3 weeks ago
I think it really depends on your wanted level. Without intercepted shipments, even if you are linked to a market payment - as long as we're not speaking crazy amounts I guess you're fine. This might be cope on my side, but I did do direct transactions to the market with my Monero through a Cryptobroker with KYC. However, just that fact might be a hint, but is not discriminating per se (And in the country where I live: not enough to search your house). You could have gone to the market only for the gambling and lose a few Moneros a week.
/u/stonecoldrockhard
1 points
3 weeks ago
Can confirm the hard way. Lost the exchange account in Kraken a day after the markets close, stating that it had suspicious activity. It's obvious looking back on it now, if you send money to the exact same address again and again its gonna look suspicious.The use of pregenerated addresses was a lazy design choice.
/u/stonecoldrockhard
1 points
3 weeks ago
and sending straight to a market from a exchange is also a dumb idea on my part
/u/VendorSchreck
1 points
3 weeks ago
Hope you will get away safely. While it was a bad design choice, it could have also happened without it after it's seizure.
And you learned from that part and don't put the blame on anybody else while still acknowledging it as a bad design choice though.
With this kind of thinking you will get far in life, a lot people would probably blame somebody else or insult me now in your situation.
/u/Ghwbushsr
1 points
3 weeks ago
dumb? yeah you could say that.

you didnt ride the short bus as a kid?
/u/[deleted]
1 points
3 weeks ago
[removed]
As long as you have an intermediate wallet, you'll be okay. NEVER KYC EXCHANGE>DNM
As a heads up if you haven't seen this yet /post/ba415876a94cd0b4adff/#c-2bc399580dcf61e52e
/u/Ratchet_Man
1 points
3 weeks ago
You use the word "they" alot. To clarify - you mean Exodus are the ones who flagged/banned you yes? If Exodus is in any way an exchange then you should have transferred to another wallet first. Also I'm in no way any expert on crypto, this is just my general observation based on what you wrote.
/u/VELLAK
1 points
3 weeks ago
if you're paying for something with XMR, always use your own wallet (like Monero GUI or Feather) on a Whonix workstation.

If you're swapping BTC to XMR, use Trocador thru tor and churn it.

"I'm no genius, but I follow basic OPSEC " if the BTC-XMR exchanges weren’t tied to your IP or identity and were properly isolated, then there shouldn't be anything to worry about.
buy bitcoin using different services and then send said bitcoin to my Exodus wallet. I would then convert my BTC to XMR. I would then send said XMR to my arch wallet

If you followed this path for few times, you were identified with quite high probability. Your theoretical anonymity set in Monero is 1:16. Depending on the usage of the remote node (don't!) and latest issues with the Monero RingSigs, your real world anonymity set could be 4:1 - 2:1 easily. You have to churn the Monero properly before engaging in any sensitive activities that require anonymity.

Remember, the Monero is probabilistically traceable and due to the latest vulnerabilities in the Monero Ring Signatures it is even more crucial.

See our related article about the issue please: /post/d5d49605b09d220d02a9