Evolving and Diversifying Selling Practices on Drug Cryptomarkets: An Exploration of Off-Platform “Direct Dealing”

• DOI: 10.1177/0022042619897425
• Author: Monica J. Barratt,Ross Coomber,Andrew Childs,Melissa Bull
• Date: 01 April 2020
• Published date: 01 April 2020
• Subject Matter: Articles

https://doi.org/10.1177/0022042619897425

Journal of Drug Issues

2020, Vol. 50(2) 173 –190

© The Author(s) 2020

Article reuse guidelines:

sagepub.com/journals-permissions

DOI: 10.1177/0022042619897425

journals.sagepub.com/home/jod

Article

Evolving and Diversifying Selling

Practices on Drug Cryptomarkets:

An Exploration of Off-Platform

“Direct Dealing”

Andrew Childs1, Ross Coomber1,2,3, Melissa Bull3,

and Monica J. Barratt4,5

Abstract

This is the first study to explore how cryptomarket actors are increasingly adopting encrypted

messaging applications to “direct deal” beyond the provided platforms, to obviate the protocols

of cryptomarkets, and to diversify the communication experience of drug buying via the dark

net. Drawing on 965 forum posts discussing encrypted messaging applications, results showed

that direct dealing may be more likely to occur in the context of preestablished trust between

vendors and buyers, during instances of law enforcement crackdowns, and when buyers are

enticed by discounts or promotions. Our findings also suggested a general hesitancy toward

direct dealing, as it was often associated with greater exposure to scams, and perceptions

that direct dealing increases the risks concerning personal security and detection from law

enforcement. These findings provide insight into the interconnection of online drug markets,

and how actors make decisions to drift between multichannel supply points mediated by

perceptions of trust and risk.

Keywords

multichannel supply, drug markets, cryptomarkets, dark net, differentiation, drugs, apps

Introduction

The emergence and expansion of the internet and other technologies have facilitated the digitali-

zation of illicit drug markets. These online illicit drug markets now operate in various forms

across the surface net (i.e., websites directly accessible through search engines such as Google

and Bing), in cryptomarkets hosted in the “dark” net, and through social media apps installed on

smartphones (Barratt & Aldridge, 2016; Martin, 2014; Moyle et al., 2019; Walsh, 2011). Online

drug markets consistently evolve in their capacity to supply illicit drugs, and the general trend

1Griffith Criminology Institute, Griffith University, Mount Gravatt, Queensland, Australia

2Department of Sociology, Social Policy and Criminology, University of Liverpool, UK

3QUT Centre for Justice, Queensland University of Technology, Brisbane, Australia

4Social and Global Studies Centre, RMIT University, Melbourne, Victoria, Australia

5National Drug and Alcohol Research Centre, University of New South Wales, Sydney, Australia

Corresponding Author:

Andrew Childs, Griffith Criminology Institute, Griffith University, 176 Messines Ridge Rd., Mount Gravatt,

Queensland 4122, Australia.

Email: andrew.childs@griffithuni.edu.au

897425JODXXX10.1177/0022042619897425Journal of Drug IssuesChilds et al.

research-article2020

174 Journal of Drug Issues 50(2)

exhibited by these markets has been the gradual implementation of features that reduce many of

the anxieties and risks traditionally associated with illicit drug buying. This is perhaps best exem-

plified by the specific conditions of exchange found within cryptomarkets, where features

intended to protect buyer and seller are embedded within the market structures (e.g., marketplace

forums, rating systems, and protective escrow payment systems) that provide buyers with assur-

ances of the seller, the product distributed by illicit drug vendors, as well as the platform (Aldridge

& Askew, 2017; Bakken et al., 2018).

The relatively recent uptake of drug supply through social media and encrypted messaging

applications (Bakken & Demant, 2019; Moyle et al., 2019), however, evidences a partial diver-

gence from this trend. The popularity of this new form of drug supply has grown despite the lack

of security features, and the increased levels of risk, in relative terms, when compared with cryp-

tomarkets. Although criminological attention on the use of encrypted messaging applications to

facilitate crime is growing (Marcum et al., 2017; Sarre, 2017), research on the use of smartphone

applications to supply and access illicit drugs is still in its infancy. End-to-end encrypted messag-

ing applications installed on smartphones (e.g., Wickr, Signal, Telegram) allow only senders and

receivers to view the messages. The companies responsible for the development of these applica-

tions encrypt network traffic, data storage, and server storage, effectively making it impossible to

access any data or user-related information (Walnycky et al., 2015). There is growing evidence,

in the form of vendor advertisements in cryptomarkets and media articles (Mantesso, 2019;

Nolan, 2018), that encrypted messaging applications are playing a role in cryptomarket activity

because of their ability to facilitate “direct deals” and retain a level of protection through

encrypted communication. In relation to cryptomarkets, and coined by actors involved in these

spaces, a “direct deal” is the process of moving away from a particular cryptomarket to deal

privately, usually via an encrypted messaging app, with a vendor. For those who progress to

direct dealing, the cryptomarket is, effectively, used as an introduction platform (Mantesso, 2019;

Nolan, 2018) rather than as the platform through which drug exchanges are coordinated. This

move toward encrypted messaging applications in cryptomarket activity is an interesting devel-

opment as the security features often valued by drug buyers in cryptomarkets (Barratt et al.,

2014, 2016; Martin, 2014; Van Buskirk et al., 2016) are not available, as the sale is conducted on

an alternate platform. This is also surprising because of the general trajectory in offline supply

toward less risky practices (Coomber & Moyle, 2018).

The primary focus of this article is to track the presence of, and examine the reasons behind,

the emergence and willingness to engage in direct dealing. Particular attention is, therefore,

placed on understanding the motivations, anxieties, and perceptions of risk in understanding this

changing practice of multichannel retailing occurring within cryptomarkets. Several media arti-

cles have discussed this practice (Mantesso, 2019; Nolan, 2018), but academic research that

mentions drug exchanges outside of cryptomarkets (Barratt et al., 2016; Kamphausen & Werse,

2019) consider it only tangentially rather than specifically focusing on this form of drug dealing.

This article begins by describing the development of online illicit drug markets to date. Following

this history, direct dealing is investigated through the lens of multichannel retailing whereby sell-

ers of products increasingly try to increase the number of customer contact points.

The Development of Online Platforms for Buying and Selling

Drugs

Over the past two decades, conventional (i.e., offline) drug markets have transitioned from open,

street-based drug markets to closed markets characterized by comparatively high levels of trust,

which was partly facilitated by the emergence of early electronic digital communication devices

such as pagers and mobile telephones (Hough & Natarajan, 2000; May & Hough, 2004). This

initial adoption of technology by drug market participants arose from the perceived need to