> Can someone explain me the technical details as to how the mirroring of the website didn't raise any suspicion from the customer or buyer side ? I don't know

> Can someone explain me the technical details as to how the mirroring of the website didn't raise any suspicion from the customer or buyer side ? I don't know any of the specifics in this case, but generally speaking, that would not be a user-visible change. The police had access to the hidden service's private key and could simply announce the service from a new location, keeping the same URL. Tor hidden services hide the location where the service is hosted (at least from regular users, less so from more powerful adversaries). > The banner there mentions that the source code of the website was changed to allow such behaviour which makes sense. However, this should only put the new buyers/sellers at risk and leave the old ones safe. What went wrong ? I don't know if they've mentioned whether they have busted only users that have used the site after the takeover - they got a massive influx of new users after AlphaBay went down, so that could've been good enough for them. Based on past cases, I imagine there were plenty of OpSec mistakes that could've lead to a bust either way. (This is probably a good example for why browser crypto is currently a bad idea.)