If this ever goes to trial, the defense-discovery of how it was done will be interesting.

Unless they use parallel reconstructionism to keep their (probably Tor) deanonymizing skillset on the down low.

That's the line that stood out to me. If so, the threat sounds like they could turn it off or reveal everyone at once, not so much a selective attack (why announce it like that then? Certainly not if you were going to use parallel reconstruction to keep the fact secret).

However, the line:

> 34 servers located in nearly 20 countries

Doesn't describe tor. You don't use that many servers (nodes). And it's strength isn't based on number of hops. That's more old school hack a box and put in a chain.

Then what's the cloak? Is their ability that they can easy "go around" somehow any X number of connections right to the source?

If the prosecutors were to do so knowingly, the prosecutors would be breaking their oath to the Constitution (and simultaneously obliterating their case/perhaps committing crimes of their own).

Like that hasn't happened before with no consequences when investigative forces were handed a cool new toy.