deep market – TOR Scam Report (1)
Onion Link: http://deepmk42fqasmnr2njaoo2pd5og5pdw7j3pmotrm7ohjgrbzmfdk6sid.onion
Scam Report Date: 2024/07/09
Client Scam Report Breakdown
Original Report Summary:
A user reports purchasing a “5200€ PayPal transfer” from a vendor on the dark web marketplace, DeepMarket. According to the user, they paid for the transfer but have not received any response or funds from the vendor. This absence of communication following the purchase signals a potential scam. The client’s report highlights two core issues: first, the lack of follow-through from the vendor after payment, and second, the absence of the promised funds in their account, which indicates that the vendor may have taken their payment without any intention of fulfilling the order. For clients on these platforms, unresponsiveness after payment is often a red flag for fraudulent activity.
Terminology and Practices on Dark Web Marketplaces
Dark web transactions like PayPal transfers fall under what is commonly known as Money Transfers on DeepMarket, where vendors advertise digital financial services, such as bank transfers, PayPal transfers, and other payment platform manipulations. In this case, a 5200€ PayPal transfer implies a service where a vendor supposedly initiates a PayPal transaction into the buyer’s account for the specified amount, typically for a fee far below the actual value. These transactions often rely on the concept of anonymity and multisig escrow systems (where multiple parties must approve the release of funds to complete a transaction). However, when these services are scams, sellers collect the payment and fail to fulfill the promised transfer, leaving the buyer with a financial loss and no available recourse.
Evaluating the Scam Claims and Client’s Position
This client’s complaint highlights a recurring issue with vendors in dark web marketplaces who claim to offer secure financial services, only to disappear after receiving payment. DeepMarket’s alleged use of “Buyer Protection” could give buyers a false sense of security, as the client’s report suggests that this feature did not prevent fraud in their case. The Buyer Protection is intended to safeguard users from losses due to fraudulent vendors by providing a means to mediate or return funds. However, in this instance, the lack of response from the vendor combined with DeepMarket’s ineffective protection mechanisms implies that the advertised security measures may be either superficial or intentionally misleading. As a result, users may be enticed into high-value transactions under a false promise of safety, ultimately leading to financial losses and, in cases like this, a complete lack of accountability from both the vendor and the marketplace.
