• sleen@lemmy.zip
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    7
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    edit-2
    22 hours ago

    With the amount of sites that are easily accessed on the dark net though the hidden wiki and other sites. This might of been a honeypot from the start.

    On the contrary, why would they announce that they seized the site? To cause more panic, and to exaggerate the actual situation?

    In addition, that last point should be considered because even if they used these type of operations, honeypotting would still be considered illegal. So Ultimately what is stopping the supreme power to abuse that power on other people?

    • quack@lemmy.zip
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      edit-2
      19 minutes ago

      No judge would authorise a honeypot that runs for multiple years, hosting original child abuse material meaning that children are actively being abused to produce content for it. That would be an unspeakable atrocity. A few years ago the Australian police seized a similar website and ran it for a matter of weeks to gather intelligence which undoubtedly protected far more children than it harmed and even that was considered too far for many.