Crime, Law and Social Change

, Volume 67, Issue 1, pp 55–75 | Cite as

Do police crackdowns disrupt drug cryptomarkets? A longitudinal analysis of the effects of Operation Onymous

  • D. Décary-HétuEmail author
  • L. Giommoni


In recent years, there has been a proliferation of online illicit markets where participants can purchase and sell a wide range of goods and services such as drugs, hacking services, and stolen financial information. Second-generation markets, known as cryptomarkets, provide a pseudo-anonymous platform from which to operate and have attracted the attention of researchers, regulators, and law enforcement. This paper focuses on the impact of police crackdowns on cryptomarkets, and more particularly on the impact of Operation Onymous, a large-scale police operation in November 2014 that targeted many cryptomarkets. Our results demonstrate that cryptomarket participants adapt to police operations and that the impact of Operation Onymous was limited in time and scope. Of particular interest is the finding that prices did not increase following Operation Onymous, even though many dealers retired shortly after it occurred.


Cryptomarket Police crackdown Displacement Illicit drug market 


  1. 1.
    Aldridge, J. & Décary-Hétu, D. (2014). Not An ‘ebay For Drugs’: The Cryptomarket’Silk Road’as A Paradigm Shifting Criminal Innovation. SSRN:
  2. 2.
    Rush, H., Smith, C., Kraemer-Mbula, E. & Tang, P. (2009). Crime Online: Cybercrime and Illegal Innovation. Online:
  3. 3.
    Martin, J. (2014). Drugs on the dark net: how cryptomarkets are transforming the global trade in illicit drugs. New York: Palgrave MacMillan.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    EMCDDA. (2015a). European Drug Report. Trends and Developments. Online:
  5. 5.
    D.O.J. (2014). Dozens of Online “Dark Markets” Seized Pursuant to Forfeiture Complaint Filed in Manhattan Federal Court in Conjunction with the Arrest of the Operator of Silk Road 2.0. Online:
  6. 6.
    D.O.J. (2015). Ross Ulbricht, the Creator and Owner of the “Silk Road” Website, Found Guilty in Manhattan Federal Court an All Counts. Online:
  7. 7.
    EMCDDA. (2015b). The Internet and Drug Markets. Summary of Results from an EMCDDA Trendspotter Study. Online:
  8. 8.
    EUROPOL. (2014). The Internet Organised Crime Threat Assessment. Online:
  9. 9.
    UNODC. (2014). World Drug Report 2014. Online:
  10. 10.
    Buxton, J. & Bingham, T. (2015). The Rise and Challenge of Dark Net Drug Markets. Online:
  11. 11.
    Van Buskirk, J., Roxburgh, A., Farrell, M., & Burns, L. (2014). The closure of the silk road: what has this meant for online drug trading? Addiction, 109(4), 517–518.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Soska, K. & Christin, N. (2015). "Measuring The Longitudinal Evolution Of The Online Anonymous Marketplace Ecosystem." 24th USENIX Security Symposium. Washington D.C., USA.Google Scholar
  13. 13.
    MacCoun, R., & Reuter, P. (2001). Drug war heresies: learning from other vices, times, & places. New York: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Rydell, C. P. & Everingham, S. S. (1994). Controlling Cocaine: Supply Versus Demand Programs. Online:
  15. 15.
    Reuter, P., & Kleiman, M. (1986). Risks and prices: an economic analysis of drug enforcement. Crime and Justice, 7, 289–340.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Caulkins, J., & Reuter, P. (1998). What Price Data Tell Us About Drug Markets. Journal of Drug Issues, 28, 593–612.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    Ramstedt, M. (2006). What drug policies cost. Estimating drug policy expenditures in Sweden. Addiction, 101(3), 330–338.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
    Reuter, P. (2006). What drug policies cost. Estimating government drug policy expenditures. Addiction, 101(3), 315–322.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. 19.
    Rigter, H. (2006). What drug policies cost. Drug policy spending in the Netherlands in 2003. Addiction, 101(3), 323–329.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. 20.
    Moore, M. H. (1990). Supply reduction and drug law enforcement. Crime and Justice, 13, 109–157.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. 21.
    Babor, T. F., Caulkings, J., Edwards, G., Fischer, B., Foxcroft, D., & Humphreys, K. (2010). Drug policy and the public good. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
  22. 22.
    Scott, M. S. (2003). The Benefits and Consequences of Police Crackdowns. Online:
  23. 23.
    Best, D., Strang, J., Beswick, T., & Gossop, M. (2001). Assessment of a concentrated, high-profile police operation. No discernible impact on drug availability, price or purity. British Journal of Criminology, 41(4), 738–745.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. 24.
    Edmunds, M., Hough, M., & Urqufa, N. (1996). Tackling Local Drug Markets. Online:
  25. 25.
    Kerr, T., Small, W., & Wood, E. (2005). The Public Health and Social Impacts of Drug Market Enforcement: A Review of the Evidence. The International Journal on Drug Policy, 16(4), 210–220.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. 26.
    Mazerolle, L., Soole, D. W., & Rombouts, S. (2006). Street-level drug law enforcement: a meta-analytical review. Journal of Experimental Criminology, 2(4), 409–435.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. 27.
    Weatherburn, D., & Lind, B. (1997). The impact of law enforcement activity on a heroin market. Addiction, 92(5), 557–569.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. 28.
    Wood, E., Spittal, P. M., Small, W., Kerr, T., Li, K., Hogg, R. S., Tyndall, M. W., Montaner, J. S. G., & Schechter, M. T. (2004). Displacement of Canada’s largest public illicit drug market in response to a police crackdown. Canadian Medical Association Journal, 170(10), 1551–1556.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. 29.
    Nguyen, H., & Reuter, P. (2012). How Risky Is Marijuana Possession? Considering the Role of Age, Race, and Gender. Crime & Delinquency, 58(6), 879–910.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. 30.
    Pollack, H. A., & Reuter, P. H. (2014). Does tougher enforcement make drugs more expensive? Addiction, 109(12), 1959–1966.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. 31.
    Small, W., Kerr, T., Charrette, J., Schechter, M. T., & Spittal, P. M. (2006). Impacts of intensified police activity on injection drug users: evidence from an ethnographic investigation. The International Journal on Drug Policy, 17(2), 85–95.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. 32.
    Bless, R., Korf, D. J., & Freeman, M. (1995). Open Drug Scenes: A Cross-National Comparison of Concepts and Urban Strategies. European Addiction Research, 1, 128–138.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. 33.
    May, T., & Hough, M. (2001). Illegal dealings: the impact of low-level police enforcement on drug markets. European Journal on Criminal Policy and Research, 9(2), 137–162.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. 34.
    Maher, L., & Dixon, D. (1999). Policing and public health: law enforcement and harm minimization in a street-level drug market. British Journal of Criminology, 39(4), 488–512.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. 35.
    Wood, E., Kerr, T., Small, W., Jones, J., & Tyndall, M. T. (2003). The impact of a police presence on access to needle exchange programs. Journal of Acquired Immune Deficiency Syndromes, 34(1), 116–118.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  36. 36.
    Weisburd, D., & Green, L. (1995). Policing Drug hot spots: the jersey city drug market analysis experiment. Justice Quarterly, 12(4), 711–735.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  37. 37.
    Dingledine, R., Mathewson, N., & Syverson, P. (2004). Tor: The Second-Generation Onion Router. Online:
  38. 38.
    Nakamoto, S. (2008). Bitcoin: A Peer-To-Peer Electronic Cash System. Online:
  39. 39.
    Chen, A. (2011). The Underground Website Where You Can Buy Any Drug Imaginable. Online:
  40. 40.
    Flitter, E. (2015). U.S. Sharply Reduces Silk Road’s Estimated Sales Volume. Online:
  41. 41.
    Christin, N. (2013). Traveling the silk road: a measurement analysis of a large anonymous online marketplace. Proceedings of the 22nd International Conference on World Wide Web. Google Scholar
  42. 42.
    FBI. (2013). "Manhattan U.S. Attorney Announces Seizure of Additional $28 Million Worth of Bitcoins Belonging to Ross William Ulbricht, Alleged Owner and Operator of “Silk Road” Website." Online: Accessed 7 Nov 2015.
  43. 43.
    OpenBazaar. (2015). OpenBazaar. Online:
  44. 44.
    Paoli, L., Greenfield, V. A., & Reuter, P. H. (2009). The world heroin market: can supply be cut? Oxford: Oxford University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  45. 45.
    Kilmer, B. (2002). Do cannabis possession laws influence cannabis use? In B. Kilmer (Ed.), Cannabis 2002 Report to the Ministers of Public Health of Belgium, France, Germany, The Netherlands and Switzerland. Retrieved from
  46. 46.
    Décary-Hétu, D. (2014). Police Operations 3.0: On the Impact and Policy Implications of Police Operations on the Warez Scene. Policy & Internet, 6(3), 315–340.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  47. 47.
    Lavorgna, A. (2015). Organised crime goes online: realities and challenges. Journal of Money Laundering Control., 18(2), 153–168.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  48. 48.
    Holt, T. J., Blevins, K. R., & Kuhns, J. B. (2008). Examining the displacement practices of Johns with on-line data. Journal of Criminal Justice, 36(6), 522–528.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  49. 49.
    Holt, T. J., & Lampke, E. (2010). Exploring stolen data markets online: products and market forces. Criminal Justice Studies, 23(1), 33–50.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  50. 50.
    Branwen, G. (2015b). Silk Road 2 Scrape Torrent Released. Online:
  51. 51.
    Branwen, G. (2015c). Evolution Market Mirror/Scrapes Torrent Released. Online:
  52. 52.
    Leclerc, B., & Wortley, R. (2014). The reasoning criminal: twenty-five years on. In B. Leclerc & R. Wortley (Eds.), Cognition and crime: offender decision making and script analyses. New York: Routledge.Google Scholar
  53. 53.
    Branwen, G. (2015a). Tor Black-Market-Related Arrests. Online:
  54. 54.
    Paoli, L. (2002). Flexible hierarchies and dynamic disorder’: the drug distribution system in Frankfurt and Milan. Drugs: Education, Prevention And Policy, 9(2), 143–151.Google Scholar
  55. 55.
    Décary-Hétu, D., & Laferrière, D. (2015). Discrediting vendors in online criminal markets. In A. Malm & G. Bichler (Eds.), Disrupting criminal networks: network analysis in crime prevention. Boulder: Lynne Rienner.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media Dordrecht 2016

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.École de criminologieUniversité de MontréalMontréalCanada
  2. 2.School of Social Sciences, Cardiff UniversityCardiffUK

Personalised recommendations