An Inside Investigation: How a Journalist Infiltrated a Carding Group (Methodology, Risks, Discoveries)

[Professor]

Ethics and Practice of Investigative Journalism on the Dark Web​

Preface: This is a generalized reconstruction based on methods described in the works of investigative journalists like Brian Krebs, as well as on analysis of real-world implementation cases. This is not a how-to guide, but a minefield map.

Phase 0: Preparation and Ethical Foundation​

1. Legal and editorial sanction. No work can begin without the written consent of the editor-in-chief and the legal department, with a clear understanding of the boundaries (what is and isn't allowed). The goal is documentation, not provocation. Journalists must not commit illegal actions, even "undercover."

2. Creation of a "legend" (alter ego).

• Technical requirements: A clean laptop with a virtual machine (e.g., Tails on a flash drive), no traces of personal information. A separate crypto wallet with a minimum amount.
• Digital profile: New email addresses, Telegram accounts (purchased SIM card), profiles on darknet forums. The cover story should be plausible but uninspiring. A typical example: "Young IT specialist from the provinces, interested in security, looking to make some extra money."
• Psychological approach: No heroism. Basic rules: do not break the law, do not provoke others to commit crimes, do not collect information about ordinary perpetrators (droppers), who may also be victims.

Ethical divide: Where is the line between observation and complicity? If a group asks to "test" a phishing page on real people, refuse. If they offer to buy a map database, refuse. A journalist can only observe, ask questions, and record suggestions.

Phase 1: Infiltration – The Journey from "Noob" to "In"​

Entry point: Closed Telegram channels, links to which can be found on carding forums on the darknet or through "invitation" chains in related chats (document sales, cashing out).

Methodology of immersion:

1. Silent Observation (Lurking): The first 2-3 weeks are all reading. Learn the slang, hierarchy, key characters (admins, guarantors, sellers), prices, and methods.
2. Gaining "trust" through small actions: Help with translating English-language instructions, technical advice on proxy setup (general, non-criminal knowledge). Demonstrating usefulness without being pushy.
3. "Buying" reputation: You may need to make a small, seemingly legitimate purchase (for example, buying a "security guide" or access to a private channel with crypto). This demonstrates seriousness of intent. The money spent on this is editorial expenses.
4. Reaching out to operators: Through general chat, demonstrating deep interest. The key is to generate interest in yourself as a potential resource.

First discovery: Accessibility. The barrier to entry is shockingly low. For $50 in crypto, you can buy a "starter pack": a database of 1,000 CVVs, receipt software, and instructions. A world that appears to be an elite tech club from the outside is, in reality, a conveyor belt for converting naivety into criminal activity.

Phase 2: In the Core – Undercover Operations​

The risks are escalating. Now the journalist is in the chat, where in real time:

• Coordinate the work of droppers.
• They "check" (check) the freshly stolen cards.
• They are discussing store break-ins.
• They share scans of the passports of "cattle-drops".

Documentation Methodology:

1. Screenshots and logs: All with personal information of ordinary participants (phone numbers, faces) redacted. Only facts, methods, amounts, and organizers' nicknames are recorded.
2. Maintaining a chain of evidence: It's important to document the unbroken chain: service offer -> discussion of details -> confirmation of completion. This can be achieved by engaging in a "dialogue" with the operator, clarifying details without taking any action.
3. Measuring scale: Queries like "what's the average daily turnover?" or "what percentage gets checked?" can yield statistics that paint a picture of the business.

Key discovery: The normalization of evil. The most shocking aspect is the mundane, routine atmosphere. Between discussions of money laundering schemes and memes about "cops," messages about "ordering pizza" or "missing summer" are interspersed. Crime has become an office job without an office.

Phase 3: Exit and "Closing" the Legend​

The most dangerous moment. An abrupt exit will arouse suspicion.

A gentle exit plan:

1. The "burnout" legend: "Guys, a friend's house is going down. The guy's been taken. I'm on edge, I need to lay low for a while, just to be on the safe side."
2. Gradually decrease your activity: Write less in the chat, then only read, then delete the message history (if possible) and leave forever.
3. "Digital Suicide": Phased phasing out all accounts created for the legend.

Risks at the exit stage:

• Revenge for a "leak": If the group suspects that you are not one of their own, but a journalist or a cop, attacks are possible: doxing (searching for a real identity), DDoS on the publication's resources, threats.
• Legal claims: The group members themselves are unlikely to take legal action, but they could formally accuse the group of "defamation" or "invasion of privacy." It is important that all published materials be carefully censored to prevent personal information from being disclosed to ordinary members.

Phase 4: Analysis and Publication – Dos and Don'ts​

What CAN and SHOULD be published:

1. Structure and business model: How the scheme works, who the key figures are (under nicknames), approximate turnover.
2. Methods and tools: Software names, operating principles (without instructions).
3. Psychological portrait of the environment: Atmosphere, rhetoric, recruitment mechanisms.
4. Specific, anonymized evidence: Screenshots of negotiations (with the nicknames and avatars of ordinary participants blurred out), lists of services.

What should NEVER be published:

1. Operational information that could disrupt an ongoing law enforcement investigation (if known).
2. Data that allows us to identify ordinary droppers or mules (their numbers, correspondence). They are often victims of fraud themselves.
3. "How to" instructions. The goal is not to create a manual, but to demonstrate the scale of the threat.
4. Unverified accusations against specific individuals, unless there is 100% certainty as to their real identity and role.

The main discoveries and results of this investigation​

1. Demythologization. Carding isn't the "High Art of Hacking," but rather a dirty conveyor belt of social engineering and the exploitation of human greed and poverty.
2. The global reach of local groups. Even a Russian-speaking group can have "drops" in Europe, cash-out centers in Armenia, and servers in the US. The investigation is stuck on the issue of jurisdiction.
3. The vulnerability of the human element. The most interesting conversations for a journalist and the biggest leaks occur not because of technical errors, but because of conflicts, greed, and bragging within a group. Criminals themselves love to talk.
4. The psychological cost to journalists is enormous. Working in an atmosphere of pervasive lies, paranoia, and cynicism leaves its mark. Psychological support and debriefing after a project are mandatory.

Conclusion: Between Light and Shadow.
A journalistic investigation into carding groups is a tightrope walk over the chasm between public interest and ethics, exposure and safety.

This is not a police sting operation. The journalist's goal is not to put someone in jail (although publication often becomes the impetus for opening a case), but to understand and explain to society this new type of threat, to demonstrate its human, and not just technological, dimension.

The most valuable conclusion of such investigations: the fight against carding is not just a task for antivirus software and the police. It is a challenge for society, which must ask itself: why do so many young, technologically gifted people see digital crime as the only path to success, status, and self-realization? And how can we create other, legal paths for them that are equally challenging, exciting, and rewarding?

An investigation from the inside reveals not only "how they work," but also "why we are losing." And therein lies its main, bittersweet value.