...
Yeah, it's a weird statement. How did the FBI determine that SR was even worth raiding if BTC was so anonymous? I'm sure they didn't go after them thinking they were only playing around with a few thousand dollars .. so I wonder what tipped them off that there were millions of dollars flowing through SR, and it was a worthwhile target to make some auction money
?
I serious doubt the anonymity or lack thereof of BTC had much to do with the SR bust. Furthermore I suspect it would have happened just the same with DRK or XMR as the currency. We must keep in mind that cash based drug dealers are busted all the time, so in reality this is not that different. There are all sorts of techniques law enforcement can use that are not dependent upon the anonymity of money. The other issue is that all privacy crypto-currency solutions are ultimately based on the concept of a small needle in a large haystack. When one talks about terrorist organizations or large drug cartels this fails because in these cases we have a large knitting needle in a comparably small haystack. There is a reason why Mexican drug cartels had to use HSBC to launder their money. They needed a large haystack in order to try to hide their knitting needle.
I agree that DRK, XMR, and BTC would have all likely provided the same situation, currently. What I was trying to point out was that .. well .. anyone can put up a website and sell drugs for money and schedule exchanges for cash/whatever. FBI may or may not go after them. In this case though, the situation was that exactly how much value exchanged hands was easily accessible and knowable. I wouldn't think FBI would be putting nearly as much resources into finding a small time exchange over a big time one (likely the reason this continued for so long? Or, perhaps there's an ulterior motive where they were collecting information .. or maybe just that it really was 'anonymous' enough and they had no idea what they were dealing with). Anyways, I'm saying that the possibility of finding out the exact amount of money flowing through the website allowed them to know exactly how much effort they should put into stopping it.
If SR was just a cash/drug drop system .. the first thing they would do is try to figure out how many people they should put on the case. If it's only a few thousand dollars, there would be much less people involved (if any at all), as compared to an exchange with millions of dollars involved. The ability to determine that so much money was accumulating in one place beforehand was just a bonus to them, because as you said above it was a needle that wasn't in a haystack. If, instead, the funds had all been going through an exchange or mixed transaction (be it cryptographically mixed, or tumbled through a mixer) .. well that would have likely hampered the investigation in that they would have had to place more initial resources into it from the start (where even then they might not yield good enough results). Maybe they'd take their time, searching out the service amongst whatever has hidden in it?
Maybe they'd locate the most common mixing services/exchanges and place them on a gag order for months .. slowly accumulating information the values of transactions and their sources and destinations by IP if possible (which would likely be supplied by the operator under order, and would circumvent the mixing service .. it would be hampered by TOR usage OFC). In this case though, that information was already accumulated and placed directly onto a blockchain as infallible proof that a transaction occurred and the details of exactly how much that transaction was worth (even if IP's weren't recorded and placed onto a database .. which many likely weren't because it used TOR) were easily tabulated. They didn't have to find sources, or rats, or even put someone under cover trying to infiltrate to find out how much volume they were dealing with. They didn't even have to put resources into funding TOR nodes and hoping that they were both exit and entry for enough people that they could paint their own picture. All they had to do on their end was confirm that the service was legitimate with a few purchases .. and then find location of the service.
They didn't have to ask the questions of: Well I see this website has a lot of traffic, and a lot of orders are placed .. but are they all legitimate? Could this site be making fake orders to create a 'haystack' so that the users of the site had some sort of plausible deniability? Or, in the very least, how can I be sure that this wont be a waste of my time and taxpayer dollars (however little that means to them) .. IE: is this an actual threat? Or my current favorite .. How much money do people spend on drugs, using magic internet money in 2014?
They didn't have to ask these questions because the entire business ledger was available for download in its complete form in under a day. This includes both the ledger they'd normally show in court, and the one that stays encrypted on your secretary's computer (or deep down under all the folders in their desk). The decision was effortless, because the exact magnitude of the offense was known beforehand.
And then there's the question of how did they find the service (though this isn't really the point I'm trying to make)? Wasn't the service using TOR? Did they catch their IP by serving up enough nodes, and then cross reference that with known wallet deposit addresses (or links to such addresses) to track them down? Or did they just find someone and 'ask' where it was based? This part isn't really relevant to my point .. which is that knowing the actual magnitude of the transactions was what would have signaled them to be investigated in the first place. That magnitude was revealed by the medium of exchange that was used. You would have a very tough time putting together an accurate picture with cryptographically-mixed values. You'd have a tough time putting together an accurate picture with non-cryptographically mixed transactions as well, but people are still going to ask (who have never met you, or even likely have ever heard of you): 'Where did this person get all this money from, and who is this person?' unless they go through a lot more work to keep the value hidden and not accumulated (something people tend to do naturally with money -- so it's kind of counter-intuitive).