wikileaks still under attack, pressure revved up

Discussion:

(too old to reply)

Harry Behrens

2010-10-21 16:32:13 UTC

Sorry to all of those who think this is "gossiping", but:

Wikileaks has been down for ca. 2 weeks now during which time the US has
at least cut off their financial channels.
This during a period where WL has announced another major leak release
this time re. Iraq.
What is also extremely disconcerting is the absolute silence of _all_
main street media to the topic (gag...?)

Now the latest tweet reads:
"WikiLeaks communications infrastructure is currently under attack.
Project BO move to coms channel S. Activate Reston5."

Yet again I would like to pint out that there seems to be a concerted
high power attack going on against WL
And yet again I would like to point out it would be interesting to know
what is rally happening.
And yet again I'd like to emphasize that this indeed a security issue;
it does concern netizens and citizens in general if major government
organisations engage in what seems to be a dirty war against a
whistleblowing organisation.

If anybody knows more, pls. do share insights...

Harry

_______________________________________________
Full-Disclosure - We believe in it.
Charter: http://lists.grok.org.uk/full-disclosure-charter.html
Hosted and sponsored by Secunia - http://secunia.com/

Jeffrey Walton

2010-10-21 17:08:25 UTC

Permalink

Hi Cal,

I can appreciate his previous efforts, but what he has done here is put many
lifes at risk, both civilians and soldiers.

Agreed.

Just to play devils advocate:
Would Barrack Obama also be culpable? His campaign platform included a
withdrawl from Iraq (Afghanistan was a different story). So troops are
still there because he [apparently] lied to [fraudulently] obtain the
office.

If the troops weren't there, then the troops would not be at risk, and
there would be no wiki leaks story. quod erat demonstrandum.

Jeffrey Walton
Baltimore, MD, US

On Thu, Oct 21, 2010 at 12:51 PM, Cal Leeming [Simplicity Media Ltd]

This will be my first and last post on this topic (again).
I've just finished watching some videos about what wikileaks have been
doing.
It appears that they released a bunch of documents that revealed information
such as GPS co-ords + details of those who co-op'd with soldiers. He also
posted the names of these people too, and a bunch of information which
could jeopardise the protection of soldiers on the ground, from all
countries.
I can appreciate his previous efforts, but what he has done here is put many
lifes at risk, both civilians and soldiers.
So, if the US military have launched an all our war on Wikileaks, whether it
be legal or not, I can't say it would be entirely shocking.

Post by Harry Behrens
Wikileaks has been down for ca. 2 weeks now during which time the US has
at least cut off their financial channels.
This during a period where WL has announced another major leak release
this time re. Iraq.
What is also extremely disconcerting is the absolute silence of _all_
main street media to the topic (gag...?)
"WikiLeaks communications infrastructure is currently under attack.
Project BO move to coms channel S. Activate Reston5."
Yet again I would like to pint out that there seems to be a concerted
high power attack going on against WL
And yet again I would like to point out it would be interesting to know
what is rally happening.
And yet again I'd like to emphasize that this indeed a security issue;
it does concern netizens and citizens in general if major government
organisations engage in what seems to be a dirty war against a
whistleblowing organisation.
If anybody knows more, pls. do share insights...
Harry

_______________________________________________
Full-Disclosure - We believe in it.
Charter: http://lists.grok.org.uk/full-disclosure-charter.html
Hosted and sponsored by Secunia - http://secunia.com/

Harry Behrens

2010-10-21 18:00:10 UTC

Permalink

An entity that has the resources that would provoke such a hollywood
esque tweet wouldn't have the ability to gag the twitter account
before this release?

would it, would it want to, has it missed it..who knows?

Wouldn't that mean the tweet is a load of shit?

Wouldn't/shouldn't/couldn't...I just don't know.
Point is I'm trying to find out what's actually happening...

-h

_______________________________________________
Full-Disclosure - We believe in it.
Charter: http://lists.grok.org.uk/full-disclosure-charter.html
Hosted and sponsored by Secunia - http://secunia.com/

BMF

2010-10-21 22:43:31 UTC

Permalink

On Thu, Oct 21, 2010 at 11:32 AM, Charles Timko

Agreed. I am all for the transparency, but WL is possibly putting our troops
at risk by releasing military strategy. I wouldn't expect JA to think that

From:

http://articles.cnn.com/2010-10-16/us/wikileaks.assessment_1_julian-assange-wikileaks-documents?_s=PM:US

The online leak of thousands of secret military documents from
the war in Afghanistan by the website WikiLeaks
did not disclose any sensitive intelligence sources or methods,
the Department of Defense concluded.

So some are playing it up but the top dude at the Pentagon is playing
it down. Who ya gonna believe? Unless someone can point to a verified
leaked document online which says "Mohammed Jihad Dirka Dirka who
lives at <lat/long> told us Osama is in that house over there" or some
such I can't believe such information is being distributed.

BMF

_______________________________________________
Full-Disclosure - We believe in it.
Charter: http://lists.grok.org.uk/full-disclosure-charter.html
Hosted and sponsored by Secunia - http://secunia.com/

coderman

2010-10-22 06:57:39 UTC

Permalink

...
So some are playing it up but [some] is playing
it down. Who ya gonna believe?

C. None of the above.

if they are mute or non-publishing it is by decision or apathy... you
can always distribute - just how much do you want it?

[the costs, why, those are quite volatile and context specific!]

_______________________________________________
Full-Disclosure - We believe in it.
Charter: http://lists.grok.org.uk/full-disclosure-charter.html
Hosted and sponsored by Secunia - http://secunia.com/

Jonathan Medina

2010-10-21 20:06:15 UTC

Permalink

I am in the military, currently in Iraq, and these Wikileaks posts
have hurt us more than people realize. It does two things, first, it
demonstrates our tactics and procedures which allow insurgents to
conduct more effective attacks against us, and second, the information
it provides to insurgents endangers our sources and the families of
sources that have provided us with valuable information. It also
provides a means of giving insurgents propaganda to use against us.
Whether you agree with the war or not, the publication of these
documents hurts people who had no say in the decision to go to war.
Having said that, I absolutely do not support the illegal attacks and
denial of service to the site. Here is a link to a tech news article i
read today on the issue.

http://cybersecurityreport.nextgov.com/2010/10/wikileaks_communications_infrastructure_attacked.php?oref=latest_posts

I have seen nothing released that reveals sensitive information such as "GPS
co-ords + details of those who co-op'd with soldiers."
This is a rumor. If you have proof that this is not a rumor, please post it.
On Thu, Oct 21, 2010 at 11:51 AM, Cal Leeming [Simplicity Media Ltd]

This will be my first and last post on this topic (again).
I've just finished watching some videos about what wikileaks have been
doing.
It appears that they released a bunch of documents that revealed
information such as GPS co-ords + details of those who co-op'd with
soldiers. He also posted the names of these people too, and a bunch of
information which could jeopardise the protection of soldiers on the ground,
from all countries.
I can appreciate his previous efforts, but what he has done here is put
many lifes at risk, both civilians and soldiers.
So, if the US military have launched an all our war on Wikileaks, whether
it be legal or not, I can't say it would be entirely shocking.

--
Cal Leeming
Operational Security & Support Team
Out of Hours: +44 (07534) 971120 | Support
IM: AIM / ICQ / MSN / Skype (available upon request)
Simplicity Media Ltd. All rights reserved.
Registered company number 7143564
--
Cal Leeming
Operational Security & Support Team
Out of Hours: +44 (07534) 971120 | Support
IM: AIM / ICQ / MSN / Skype (available upon request)
Simplicity Media Ltd. All rights reserved.
Registered company number 7143564
_______________________________________________
Full-Disclosure - We believe in it.
Charter: http://lists.grok.org.uk/full-disclosure-charter.html
Hosted and sponsored by Secunia - http://secunia.com/

Colin Copley

2010-10-22 18:49:40 UTC

Permalink

The more knowledge of your enemy tactics you have the better no?

And though I would still prefer actual proof of the info, the Pentagon
top brass debunking is something they would do if it were true as well?

As a result, even 100% perfect knowledge of our tactics wouldn't
translate into all *that* big an increase in attack effectiveness, unless
hidden in that 5% is a "ventilation shaft that leads directly to the reactor
core" flaw in our tactics ("Every 3rd Tuesday, we do XYZ and one very small
bomb in the right place would set off a chain reaction of all the munitions on
the base").
I believe the "endangers our sources" part has already been debunked
by the top leadership at the Pentagon.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
_______________________________________________
Full-Disclosure - We believe in it.
Charter: http://lists.grok.org.uk/full-disclosure-charter.html
Hosted and sponsored by Secunia - http://secunia.com/

Shain Singh

2010-10-21 23:38:02 UTC

Permalink

Off topic but...

the information it provides to insurgents endangers our sources and the families of
sources that have provided us with valuable information.

These people are giving you information but would be well aware of the
danger they are putting themselves in by providing you that
information, or at least they should be made aware..

It also provides a means of giving insurgents propaganda to use against us.

The propaganda presumably exists regardless of WL disclosure...

Whether you agree with the war or not, the publication of these
documents hurts people who had no say in the decision to go to war.

I am by no means trying to offend yourself or the people at war by
this.. just making some counterclaims.

Cheers,

Shain

_______________________________________________
Full-Disclosure - We believe in it.
Charter: http://lists.grok.org.uk/full-disclosure-charter.html
Hosted and sponsored by Secunia - http://secunia.com/

V***@vt.edu

2010-10-22 18:08:54 UTC

Permalink

Post by Jonathan Medina
I am in the military, currently in Iraq, and these Wikileaks posts
have hurt us more than people realize. It does two things, first, it
demonstrates our tactics and procedures which allow insurgents to
conduct more effective attacks against us,

I suspect that the insurgents already knew 90 to 95% of our tactics and
procedures simply by observing how we do things. After all, most of what we do
can be easily learned by a good scout with a vantage point and a good pair of
binoculars. How far apart do we drive on a convoy? Which armaments are
on the vehicles in front, at back? Which directions do the lookouts on the
first and last vehicles tend to look? What formations do we use during
house-to-house searches? These are all things that any competent
commander has to assume the other side knows because the other side
has good scouts and access to binoculars. Think - how much do *we*
know about insurgent tactics even without Wikileaks posting the
insurgent playbook?

As a result, even 100% perfect knowledge of our tactics wouldn't
translate into all *that* big an increase in attack effectiveness, unless
hidden in that 5% is a "ventilation shaft that leads directly to the reactor
core" flaw in our tactics ("Every 3rd Tuesday, we do XYZ and one very small
bomb in the right place would set off a chain reaction of all the munitions on
the base").

And if we have that sort of flaw in our tactics, maybe we should actually
fix them rather than depend on security through obscurity.

Just sayin'.

Post by Jonathan Medina
and second, the information
it provides to insurgents endangers our sources and the families of
sources that have provided us with valuable information. It also
provides a means of giving insurgents propaganda to use against us.

I believe the "endangers our sources" part has already been debunked
by the top leadership at the Pentagon.

John Bond

2010-10-23 12:59:53 UTC

Permalink

On Fri, Oct 22, 2010 at 11:44 PM, Cal Leeming [Simplicity Media Ltd]

You do raise a very good argument, especially the part about "security
through obscurity".
I don't know if Wikileaks have done a good thing or not, but rather than
release everything, they should have had someone analyse the documents, and
pick out the bits which they felt the public needed to know (anything
considered a scandal etc) .. We don't care about soldiers movements or
tactics, but an insurgent might... I see little reason why they'd need to
release all the documents, other than out of lazyness/insufficient staff to
review all the info..

I was trying hard to not respond to this thread. I am not condoning
or condemning wikileaks however the above statement sort of misses the
point of wikileaks. the mass media does what you have suggested and
look how well that works. wikileaks rightly or wrongly (and possibly
unsuccessfully) tries to overcome these issues by presenting the raw
information so people can make there own mind up.

_______________________________________________
Full-Disclosure - We believe in it.
Charter: http://lists.grok.org.uk/full-disclosure-charter.html
Hosted and sponsored by Secunia - http://secunia.com/

Cal Leeming [Simplicity Media Ltd]

2010-10-23 19:22:55 UTC

Permalink

Yes this is true, but a little bit of common sense on wikileaks behalf could
have been exercised, you know?

Post by John Bond
On Fri, Oct 22, 2010 at 11:44 PM, Cal Leeming [Simplicity Media Ltd]

and

pick out the bits which they felt the public needed to know (anything
considered a scandal etc) .. We don't care about soldiers movements or
tactics, but an insurgent might... I see little reason why they'd need to
release all the documents, other than out of lazyness/insufficient staff

review all the info..

--
Cal Leeming

Operational Security & Support Team

*Out of Hours: *+44 (07534) 971120 | *Support Tickets: *
***@simplicitymedialtd.co.uk
*Fax: *+44 (02476) 578987 | *Email: ****@simplicitymedialtd.co.uk
*IM: *AIM / ICQ / MSN / Skype (available upon request)
Simplicity Media Ltd. All rights reserved.
Registered company number 7143564

Roger

2010-10-21 16:51:15 UTC

Permalink

I believe that most of the times it is not what you defend but how you
defend it.
I believe in Government transparency but the way WL is going about it
it's not right, in my honest opinion.
So this is good news in my opinion...

-r

_______________________________________________
Full-Disclosure - We believe in it.
Charter: http://lists.grok.org.uk/full-disclosure-charter.html
Hosted and sponsored by Secunia - http://secunia.com/

Charles Timko

2010-10-21 18:32:08 UTC

Permalink

Agreed. I am all for the transparency, but WL is possibly putting our troops
at risk by releasing military strategy. I wouldn't expect JA to think that
there is any inclination of strategy in the documents they published, but
there is a lot of strategy and a LOT of information that is now visible to
more than just United States citizens.

-timko

-----Original Message-----
From: full-disclosure-***@lists.grok.org.uk
[mailto:full-disclosure-***@lists.grok.org.uk] On Behalf Of Roger
Sent: Thursday, October 21, 2010 12:51 PM
To: full-***@lists.grok.org.uk
Subject: Re: [Full-disclosure] wikileaks still under attack, pressure revved
up

I believe that most of the times it is not what you defend but how you
defend it.
I believe in Government transparency but the way WL is going about it it's
not right, in my honest opinion.
So this is good news in my opinion...

-r

_______________________________________________
Full-Disclosure - We believe in it.
Charter: http://lists.grok.org.uk/full-disclosure-charter.html
Hosted and sponsored by Secunia - http://secunia.com/

_______________________________________________
Full-Disclosure - We believe in it.
Charter: http://lists.grok.org.uk/full-disclosure-charter.html
Hosted and sponsored by Secunia - http://secunia.com/

PsychoBilly

2010-10-22 07:52:02 UTC

Permalink

1+ propaganda victim ( man! you're a hacker, don't you remember? )

I apologise for this, I had heard this in, what I had believed to be, a credible news report.

1+ truthfull obviousness

Hi Cal,
If the troops weren't there, then the troops would not be at risk, and
there would be no wiki leaks story. quod erat demonstrandum.

Moreover.
1 unique media is giving factuals datas.
Others medias are dressing reality like lil girls play dolls.

The troops in dangers we're talking about
goes out in heavily armored apache helicopter, or Kombat-grade Light tanks
Then ( sometimes ) make strawberry milk-shakes with civilians, because one of them is handling
" what could be interprated as a weapon "

Guess, who's the most at risk, here?

Should we consider releasing war.logs, and thus speed up troops.withdrawal process, a mess?
I believe the opposite.

_______________________________________________
Full-Disclosure - We believe in it.
Charter: http://lists.grok.org.uk/full-disclosure-charter.html
Hosted and sponsored by Secunia - http://secunia.com/

Colin Copley

2010-10-22 17:18:20 UTC

Permalink

Well I think 'Twatter' risks alienating the sex professional community
who you will need to buy in, something a little more upmarket perhaps.

_______________________________________________
Full-Disclosure - We believe in it.
Charter: http://lists.grok.org.uk/full-disclosure-charter.html
Hosted and sponsored by Secunia - http://secunia.com/

Cal Leeming

2010-10-23 21:57:05 UTC

Permalink

So, it appears Wikileaks is now back online.. And they have put a new
'warlogs' database online.. They do appear to have filtered out various
things (there's ---'s in place of where words should be)... I don't know
if this is like a cut down version of what they have, but it's is
tediously boring to read through :S

Troy Canasta

2010-10-24 19:52:11 UTC

Permalink

Yes, making the logs more heavily redacted than a perfectly legal FOIA could have been.

Whatever news wants to spin it as, It just pisses me off when someone who breaks clear rules is valorized and canonized in the press.

--- On Sat, 10/23/10, Cal Leeming <***@foxwhisper.co.uk> wrote:

From: Cal Leeming <***@foxwhisper.co.uk>
Subject: Re: [Full-disclosure] wikileaks still under attack, pressure revved up
To: "Harry Behrens" <***@behrens.com>
Cc: full-***@lists.grok.org.uk
Date: Saturday, October 23, 2010, 9:57 PM

So, it appears Wikileaks is now back online.. And they have put a new
'warlogs' database online.. They do appear to have filtered out various
things (there's ---'s in place of where words should be)... I don't know
if this is like a cut down version of what they have, but it's is
tediously boring to read through :S

Cal Leeming [Simplicity Media Ltd]

2010-10-23 22:05:01 UTC

Permalink

PsychoBilly

2010-10-26 08:00:05 UTC

Permalink

http://www.voltairenet.org/IMG/pdf/gates-wikileaks.pdf

Fax from John McCain to Senate Chairman Carl Levin.

" The initial assessment in no way discounts the risk to national security; however,
the review to date has not revealed
any sensitive intelligence sources and methods compromised by this disclosure "

I can appreciate his previous efforts, but what he has done here is put many lifes at risk, both civilians and soldiers.

Charles Timko

2010-10-26 13:49:07 UTC

Permalink

The fax isn't from Senator McCain, the fax is from the Secretary of
Defense, Robert Gates. Notice the letter header, which clearly states
"Secretary of Defense." It was CC'd to Senator McCain.

~Timko

-----Original Message-----
From: full-disclosure-***@lists.grok.org.uk
[mailto:full-disclosure-***@lists.grok.org.uk] On Behalf Of PsychoBilly
Sent: Tuesday, October 26, 2010 4:00 AM
To: full-***@lists.grok.org.uk
Subject: Re: [Full-disclosure] wikileaks still under attack, pressure revved
up

http://www.voltairenet.org/IMG/pdf/gates-wikileaks.pdf

Fax from John McCain to Senate Chairman Carl Levin.

" The initial assessment in no way discounts the risk to national security;
however, the review to date has not revealed any sensitive intelligence
sources and methods compromised by this disclosure "

[[ Cal Leeming [Simplicity Media Ltd] ]] @ [[ 21/10/2010 18:51
]]--------------------------------------------------

I can appreciate his previous efforts, but what he has done here is put

many lifes at risk, both civilians and soldiers.

_______________________________________________
Full-Disclosure - We believe in it.
Charter: http://lists.grok.org.uk/full-disclosure-charter.html
Hosted and sponsored by Secunia - http://secunia.com/

_______________________________________________
Full-Disclosure - We believe in it.
Charter: http://lists.grok.org.uk/full-disclosure-charter.html
Hosted and sponsored by Secunia - http://secunia.com/