February 24, 2026

Introduction

Dark web research remains a difficult domain. It is essential for uncovering illicit activity, yet fraught with ethical, operational, and legal complications. Unlike traditional threat intelligence work, dark web investigations often require some level of immersion in communities built on illicit activity and therefore requires its own set of rules and practices.

While DarkOwl Vision allows researchers to safely search and monitor the dark web without embarking on these complications, it is important to understand what the ethical and legal best practices are and what guidelines need to be followed and are followed by DarkOwl analysts.

This blog explores the key ethical and legal tensions, maps them against the DOJ’s (Department of Justice) guidance, and offers practical considerations for responsible dark web research.

DOJ’s 2020 Guidance

In February 2020, the DOJ’s Cybersecurity Unit released a guidance document titled Legal Considerations when Gathering Online Cyber Threat Intelligence and Purchasing Data from Illicit Sources.

This is the guidance in the US for which dark web research and interactions should comply with. The guidance is aimed at companies and security firms who engage in online threat intelligence gathering; this includes monitoring dark web forums, marketplaces, or purchasing data, malware, or exploit information offered in “dark markets.” The goal of the guidance is to help analysts assess their potential exposure under federal criminal law when participating in certain activities or the purpose of their research. It particularly focuses on accessing, purchasing, or using illicitly obtained data.

However, the document is not legally binding, and it does not create rights or immunity from prosecution. And it does not address all use cases and activities. For example, it explicitly does not purport to deal with every scenario (e.g., child-pornography forums or illicit drug markets may involve additional legal issues).

The guidance recommends private actors who do more than “passive monitoring” (e.g., active communication, purchasing) to:

1. create a written operational plan or “rules of engagement”
2. keep records of how data is collected and used
3. work with legal counsel before engaging in risky activities

Let’s explore some of the specific activities the guidance covers and what best practices should be.

Passive Monitoring

According to the DOJ, passive monitoring of publicly accessible dark web forums or marketplaces (reading, collecting posts, observing patterns) “poses little risk of federal criminal liability,” provided the researcher does not exploit vulnerabilities or misuse credentials.

Best practice: still maintain documentation — e.g., record what tools you used (crawler, VPN, etc.), what forums you monitored, timestamps, and your research purpose. DarkOwl Vision does this for you, so you don’t have to.

Active Participation, Purchasing Data, or Engaging on Forums

Per DOJ guidance, active communication, use of unauthorized credentials (stolen credentials), or purchase of stolen data or malware can trigger liability under federal statutes. Therefore, any of these actions need to be undertaken with extreme caution and legal advice. While researchers can create fake personas, or sock puppets, they cannot use third-party or stolen credentials to access sites. Creating sock puppets does not guarantee immunity and should be done in compliance with company policy and with documentation of what was created and for what.

Purchasing data is a very risky area; it is a must that you have proper legal authorization in place before purchasing any data. This should only be done in a “defensive” way, buying back your own data, for example. However, you must make sure that you evidence that there is no criminal intent and document the reason for purchasing the data. Legal review is essential, as well as clear and thorough documentation.

This is not just a legal matter, however. Ethically we want to ensure that we are not supporting the criminal ecosystem by providing funds to threat actors that could be used for further attacks in the future. This is why DarkOwl never buys data.

If analysts need to interact directly on the dark web, the following practices are recommended:

• Passive monitoring only (no purchases, no unauthorized credentials)
• Maintain written operational plan and rules of engagement
• Keep full logs and records of activity (what, when, why)
• Seek legal counsel before any active engagement (purchase, communication, exploit use)
• Minimize or avoid storing sensitive/stolen data; prefer metadata or anonymized indicators
• If publishing, treat attribution as probabilistic; avoid definitive claims without strong evidence
• Avoid methodologies that exploit vulnerabilities or unauthorized access to private systems/services

Conclusion

With the release of DOJ’s 2020 guidance, dark web research is no longer a completely lawless frontier for private researchers — but neither is it risk-free or ethically trivial. The guidance provides a valuable baseline for lawful behavior, but it should be treated as a floor, not a ceiling. Ethical, responsible research demands transparent documentation, strict adherence to “least-impact” principles (passive monitoring, data minimization), and legal review before engaging in higher-risk activities.

DarkOwl is the leader in darknet data. Contact us to learn how we can help with your research and monitoring.