Digital anonymity as an element of the method of committing fraud

Relevance. The rapid shift of fraud into the digital environment has fundamentally transformed the nature of criminal conduct and the methods used to implement deceptive schemes. The use of anonymizing tools—virtual numbers, anti-detect browsers, cryptocurrency transit services, drop infrastructures, VPNs and Tor—creates a distributed technological model that conceals the offender’s identity, complicates the establishment of causal links, and hinders qualification under Articles 159, 159.3, and 159.6 of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation. The examination of the role of such tools is increasingly significant for both legal doctrine and law enforcement practice. Purpose ‒ is to determine the significance of digital anonymization as an element of the method of committing fraud and to identify its impact on qualification and evidentiary standards. Objectives include characterizing anonymization tools used in digital fraud schemes, identifying their functional role, assessing their implications for the qualification of participants in distributed schemes, and determining key evidentiary challenges. Methodology. The article employs methods of systemic analysis, functional assessment, comparative legal research, and forensic examination of digital traces. Results. The study establishes that anonymizing infrastructure is a stable component of digital fraud mechanisms and shapes the distribution of roles among participants. Traditional criteria of complicity do not adequately reflect technical actions such as registering credentials, preparing digital profiles, or ensuring the transit of funds. Significant evidentiary difficulties arise from the ephemeral nature of digital identifiers and the lack of unified standards for their collection. A comprehensive assessment confirms the need to revise approaches to determining the role of technical participants and to standardize procedures for handling digital traces. Conclusion. Digital anonymization constitutes an independent element of the method of committing fraud and must be considered in both qualification and proof. The unification of methodologies for handling digital traces and assessing functional participation in distributed schemes will improve investigative quality and stabilize judicial practice without amending Article 159 of the Criminal Code.