Keep the Hands That Pay Separate from the Hands That Deal

No. DAR focuses solely on compliant payment execution and sanctions screening. We do not engage with threat actors.

DAR separates payments from negotiations to eliminate conflicts of interest. DigitalMint and other firms combine both, risking blurred ethical and compliance boundaries.

Our ELI platform and crypto reserves enable immediate payment execution once legal clearance is confirmed.

Yes. DAR is a trusted payment partner for insurers, breach counsel, and DFIR teams worldwide.

When the same provider both negotiates and handles payment, they may be financially incentivized toward larger or faster ransoms, which can distort advice, inflate costs, or increase legal risk. Recent reporting describes alleged kickbacks involving a former negotiator in the market, illustrating exactly how incentives can misalign.

Read Article

The DOJ is investigating a former employee tied to ransomware negotiations and alleged kickbacks; the employer says the person was terminated and that the company isn’t the target. Investigations continue; DOJ and FBI declined comment. This a formal case, but how can trust be restored?

Read Article

Trade and security outlets echoed concerns that negotiators might steer outcomes for personal gain — an acute risk during high-pressure incidents.

Read Article

DAR does not negotiate with threat actors. We specialize only in compliant payment execution (i.e. threat-actor attribution, sanctions screening, wallet setup, and verified transfer). This separation eliminates negotiation incentives from the payment decision.

1. Independent sanctions screening (e.g., OFAC, EU, UN, UK lists) before any transfer
2. Attribution diligence tying IOCs/TTPs to known actors
3. Documented workflow (KYC/AML, approvals, test tx)
4. Transparent fee model (no % of ransom)
5. Immutable audit trail (The kickback allegations underscore why these controls matter.) 

Read Article

Yes, commentary highlighted the “moral hazard” of models where intermediaries earn more on bigger ransoms, warning that “objective advice is not going to follow.”

Read Article

You could face sanctions exposure (fines/penalties) and ongoing legal risk. DAR’s process includes threat-actor attribution and multi-list sanctions checks before any transfer is authorized.

ELI (encrypted portal): Centralizes case data, forensics handoff, and attestations, creating a clean, auditable workflow for counsel, carriers, and IR partners.

DAR’s software for wallet management + sanctions screening, enforcing checks and approvals before funds move.

Yes. Keep your negotiator. DAR slots in after a settlement framework exists to:

• Validate attribution
• Screen sanctions
• Create/manage wallets
• Run test transactions
• Execute the compliant payment, clean separation, clean incentives.

Once counsel clears the path and due diligence is complete, pre-built wallets, crypto reserves, and ELI workflows allow payment to proceed rapidly, without skipping the compliance gates that protect you.

• “Do you negotiate and handle payments?”
• “How are your fees structured?”
• “Show us your sanctions screening + attribution process.”
• “Where’s the immutable audit trail?”
• “Who signs off and when?”