WikiLeaks

From LeakDirectory

(Difference between revisions)
Jump to: navigation, search
(zehTmQDBCI)
(SPAM deletion)
 
(One intermediate revision not shown)
Line 1: Line 1:
-
Thought provoking rctiale. The issue of rape  and non consensual sex has been evolving in my mind these past few years. I always took the opinion that rape was violent, forceful and that resistance was given. I have been told over the course of these past few years that rape (or non consensual sex) is often more passive and happens more often then most people are aware of and is spoken of relatively little. This still makes me wonder a bit, if you don't want to have sex and the person is not going to physical assault you why not stop it and draw a perimeter (okay, maybe our  fantastic  culture is to blame)? I have been told stories of two people who are sexually aroused and then one decides that they don't want to continue but the other presses and even after verbal resistance they continue to approach until the other person becomes passive and just kind of waits it out, or, has sex non consensually.Still seems a little weird to me  I guess i have this distorted view of women, because of my mother, that they are all very aggressive and don't put up with no shit  and will kick you in the balls. Then again, this type of behavior was learned by her due to certain circumstances, if you catch my drift. I don't really understand completely yet the whole passive victim idea yet but i think it has to do with fear and repression and psychological domination. I do understand that one is doing something they don't want to and being subject to domination via another's will and that this causes emotional and physical stress. But this is not the primary comment i wanted to make.There has recently been work done on investigating hierarchy structures in  open  systems, like the internet. It seems that one of the hypothesis is that in open systems power structures form which are often more inclusive and secretive then top down systems and that the idea of a completely bottom up  crowd power  is kind of an illusion. Simply because there is free access to domains of the environment (internet) does not discount the impact which cultural suggestions can have on people, and in essence a type of control structure can be formalized with this in mind. Most people believe that when they surf the internet that they are free to go wherever they please but i have a hunch that there are strong cultural forces which limit where they would be willing to go openly. I remember feeling this the other day concerning wikileaks and plans to introduce some type of internet control because of these types of threats. I was so against the idea that i didn't even want to look at the video of the people meeting to discuss this because i was afraid of their plans But i eventually watched it and it seemed they will have to fight a bit harder to get their agenda across still.When something goes from an idea to an action on the internet there is generally some type of hierarchy system that spontaneously assembles. Massive distribution and decentralization works for machines better then humans i believe, i mean look at the operation pay back  folks, that was a cluster of chaos and disorderly anarchy at it's best. The crowd is hard to appease and function efficiently in whole when the who crowd it self is giving orders.
+
Love them or hate them, WikiLeaks.org has had a massive impact on the world of whistleblowing. on investigative journalism and on some (Western) politicians and government agencies, which has been documented ''ad nauseum'' elsewhere by the mainstream media the blogosphere, the twitterverse and also in books, documentaries and forthcoming films.
 +
 
 +
For the best part of 2 years, they have effectively ceased to be a whistleblower website, as '''they no longer bother to accept and publish any new whistleblower leaks via their (broken) website submission system. '''
 +
 
 +
However, see: [https://p10.secure.hostingprod.com/@spyblog.org.uk/ssl/wikileak/2011/10/julian-assange-promises-a-new-wikileaksorg-submission-system-to-launch-on-28th-n.html Julian Assange promises a new WikiLeakS.org submission system to launch on 28th November 2011]
 +
 
 +
The promised new system has '''not''' been launched at the delayed press conference on 1st December 2011:
 +
 
 +
[https://p10.secure.hostingprod.com/@spyblog.org.uk/ssl/wikileak/2011/12/so-where-exactly-is-the-promised-new-wikileaksorg-whistleblower-leak-submission.html So where exactly is the promised new WikiLeakS.org whistleblower leak submission system ? Nowhere to be seen]
 +
 
 +
Nevertheless there are lessons for post-Wikileaks.org websites to learn from their strengths, weaknesses, triumphs and disasters:
 +
 
 +
 
 +
== '''Strengths and triumphs''' ==
 +
 
 +
 
 +
<ul>
 +
 
 +
<li>Their successful legal challenge to being censored through a Court Injunction in the USA, aimed at their Domain Name Registrar and DNS service providers, bolstered by the use of lots of volunteer contributed Cover Name domain name aliases, in multiple legal jurisdictions.  
 +
 
 +
<li>Julian Assange's credibility with mainstream media organisations
 +
 
 +
<li>Various "scoops" picked up by the mainstream media
 +
 
 +
<li>Managing to get some of the US Diplomatic Cables leaks mirrored to lots of websites, making this information effectively uncensorable.
 +
 
 +
<li>Publishing the MD5 and SHA1 hashes and Expiry Date from their Digital Certificates on the WikiLeaks.org website (when they did bother to use them), potentially adding some confidence and trust, independent of the Public Key Infrastructure.
 +
 
 +
<li>Inspiration  and consultancy helping to set in motion the forthcoming changes in media and censorship laws in Iceland - [http://immi.is/Home International Modern Media Institute]
 +
 
 +
<li>Becoming, for a time, the Publisher Of Last Resort, allowing mainstream media journalists and political activists to debate scandals being hidden by the rich and powerful through the use and abuse of Court Injunctions or even Super Injunctions e.g. the [https://secure.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/wiki/Trafigura Trafigura Super Injunction case], by indirectly mentioning that the background documents might be found on WikiLeaks.org, without having to directly link to them themselves.
 +
 
 +
<li>Delayed publication request feature (when the submission system still worked) - this added some extra comfort for whistleblowers aware of Communications Data Traffic Analysis.
 +
 
 +
<li>[https://secure.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/wiki/Magnetlinks Magnet link URIs] to published documents, to help with BitTorrent style Peer to Peer file distribution.
 +
Cryptographic hash checksums of published documents were /are available (but no explanation or links or tools to enable ordinary users of the website to verify these themselves)
 +
 
 +
<li>Removal of potentially incriminating meta-data from uploaded whistleblower documents and files and digital images, before publication (N.B. sometimes these are the only clues to the authenticity of the material)
 +
</ul>
 +
 
 +
 
 +
== '''Weaknesses and mistakes''' ==
 +
 
 +
 
 +
<ul>
 +
 
 +
<li>The abandonment of the "wiki" part of WikiLeaks.org - why did they stop allowing analysis and commentary on their back history of leaked documents, even if they were no longer publishing new ones ?
 +
 
 +
<li>The abandonment of the original [http://wikileaks.org WikiLeaks.org] website (originally with PRQ internet in Sweden, but now using web hosting  associated with Russian spammers and fraudsters) in favour of the PirateParty hosted [http://Wikileaks.ch WikiLeaks.ch]
 +
 
 +
<li>Their unsuccessful struggles to use online financial payments systems like PayPal to raise funds.
 +
 
 +
<li>The attempts to use cryptic, easily misconstrued 140 character Twitter messages without any supporting, detailed  full page Press Releases on the website, to try to communicate major issues or complicated arguments.
 +
 
 +
<li>Technical failures with SSL/TLS Digital Certificates (they let them expire, they swapped and changed to and from reasonably trustworthy commercially available certificates and totally untrustworthy self signed one, to the current website which no longer bothers with encryption at all, even though it solicits personal details from journalists and volunteers etc.
 +
 
 +
<li>The abandonment of PGP Encryption
 +
 
 +
<li>The abandonment of the use of Tor Hidden Service
 +
 
 +
<li>Email list blunder revealing the identities of some financial contributors
 +
 
 +
<li>Periodically "deep linking" to graphics or videos on external websites, thereby handing over website visitor IP address and browser details of almost all visitors to the WikiLeaks.org website, including potential whistleblowers or insider volunteer leak analysts, to other commercial and government organisations.
 +
 
 +
<li>Lack of financial transparency
 +
 
 +
<li>Julian Assange's dictatorial monomaniacal management style of what now looks like a cult.
 +
 
 +
<li>Julian Assange's threats of legal action against former mainstream media partners like The Guardian newspaper over, of all things "his" copyright of whisteleblower submitted material (which obviously actually belongs to say, the US Government)
 +
 
 +
<li>Julian Assange's arrest in the UK and extradition proceedings to Sweden on non-WikiLeaks related sexual allegations  which obviously distracts from any whistleblowing.
 +
 
 +
<li>Actual deceit about claims to have "thousands" or "millions" of Chinese government documents ready for publication
 +
 
 +
<li>Multiple lies to the media and independent commentators, about the size of the WikiLeaks.org organisation and its technical computer infrastructure.
 +
 
 +
<li>False claims about being the spark or inspiration for the "Arab Spring" popular uprisings in 2011.
 +
 
 +
<li>Publishing leaked documents containing the identifiable personal data of thousands of innocent people, without any redaction or censorship
 +
 
 +
<li>Failure to register all of the "best" domain name variations of their chosen website domain name e.g. Wikileaks.com or WikiLeak.org - not acceptable for a global organisation / brand name.
 +
 
 +
<li>Lack of multiple offsite encrypted data backups leading to a Single Point of Failure
 +
 
 +
<li>The whole WiikiLeaks versus OpenLeaks media propaganda and potentially libelous accusations via Twitter and via third party websites and blogs, but still no relevant Press Releases on the "official" WikiLeaks.ch website at all.
 +
 
 +
<li>The incompetent re-use of the encryption password to a full unredacted copy of the whole US Embassy Cables file cables.csv and the failure to accept any blame for publishing this on peer to peer networks via BitTorrent themselves
 +
 
 +
</ul>

Latest revision as of 20:50, 17 March 2012

Love them or hate them, WikiLeaks.org has had a massive impact on the world of whistleblowing. on investigative journalism and on some (Western) politicians and government agencies, which has been documented ad nauseum elsewhere by the mainstream media the blogosphere, the twitterverse and also in books, documentaries and forthcoming films.

For the best part of 2 years, they have effectively ceased to be a whistleblower website, as they no longer bother to accept and publish any new whistleblower leaks via their (broken) website submission system.

However, see: Julian Assange promises a new WikiLeakS.org submission system to launch on 28th November 2011

The promised new system has not been launched at the delayed press conference on 1st December 2011:

So where exactly is the promised new WikiLeakS.org whistleblower leak submission system ? Nowhere to be seen

Nevertheless there are lessons for post-Wikileaks.org websites to learn from their strengths, weaknesses, triumphs and disasters:


Strengths and triumphs

  • Their successful legal challenge to being censored through a Court Injunction in the USA, aimed at their Domain Name Registrar and DNS service providers, bolstered by the use of lots of volunteer contributed Cover Name domain name aliases, in multiple legal jurisdictions.
  • Julian Assange's credibility with mainstream media organisations
  • Various "scoops" picked up by the mainstream media
  • Managing to get some of the US Diplomatic Cables leaks mirrored to lots of websites, making this information effectively uncensorable.
  • Publishing the MD5 and SHA1 hashes and Expiry Date from their Digital Certificates on the WikiLeaks.org website (when they did bother to use them), potentially adding some confidence and trust, independent of the Public Key Infrastructure.
  • Inspiration and consultancy helping to set in motion the forthcoming changes in media and censorship laws in Iceland - International Modern Media Institute
  • Becoming, for a time, the Publisher Of Last Resort, allowing mainstream media journalists and political activists to debate scandals being hidden by the rich and powerful through the use and abuse of Court Injunctions or even Super Injunctions e.g. the Trafigura Super Injunction case, by indirectly mentioning that the background documents might be found on WikiLeaks.org, without having to directly link to them themselves.
  • Delayed publication request feature (when the submission system still worked) - this added some extra comfort for whistleblowers aware of Communications Data Traffic Analysis.
  • Magnet link URIs to published documents, to help with BitTorrent style Peer to Peer file distribution. Cryptographic hash checksums of published documents were /are available (but no explanation or links or tools to enable ordinary users of the website to verify these themselves)
  • Removal of potentially incriminating meta-data from uploaded whistleblower documents and files and digital images, before publication (N.B. sometimes these are the only clues to the authenticity of the material)


Weaknesses and mistakes

  • The abandonment of the "wiki" part of WikiLeaks.org - why did they stop allowing analysis and commentary on their back history of leaked documents, even if they were no longer publishing new ones ?
  • The abandonment of the original WikiLeaks.org website (originally with PRQ internet in Sweden, but now using web hosting associated with Russian spammers and fraudsters) in favour of the PirateParty hosted WikiLeaks.ch
  • Their unsuccessful struggles to use online financial payments systems like PayPal to raise funds.
  • The attempts to use cryptic, easily misconstrued 140 character Twitter messages without any supporting, detailed full page Press Releases on the website, to try to communicate major issues or complicated arguments.
  • Technical failures with SSL/TLS Digital Certificates (they let them expire, they swapped and changed to and from reasonably trustworthy commercially available certificates and totally untrustworthy self signed one, to the current website which no longer bothers with encryption at all, even though it solicits personal details from journalists and volunteers etc.
  • The abandonment of PGP Encryption
  • The abandonment of the use of Tor Hidden Service
  • Email list blunder revealing the identities of some financial contributors
  • Periodically "deep linking" to graphics or videos on external websites, thereby handing over website visitor IP address and browser details of almost all visitors to the WikiLeaks.org website, including potential whistleblowers or insider volunteer leak analysts, to other commercial and government organisations.
  • Lack of financial transparency
  • Julian Assange's dictatorial monomaniacal management style of what now looks like a cult.
  • Julian Assange's threats of legal action against former mainstream media partners like The Guardian newspaper over, of all things "his" copyright of whisteleblower submitted material (which obviously actually belongs to say, the US Government)
  • Julian Assange's arrest in the UK and extradition proceedings to Sweden on non-WikiLeaks related sexual allegations which obviously distracts from any whistleblowing.
  • Actual deceit about claims to have "thousands" or "millions" of Chinese government documents ready for publication
  • Multiple lies to the media and independent commentators, about the size of the WikiLeaks.org organisation and its technical computer infrastructure.
  • False claims about being the spark or inspiration for the "Arab Spring" popular uprisings in 2011.
  • Publishing leaked documents containing the identifiable personal data of thousands of innocent people, without any redaction or censorship
  • Failure to register all of the "best" domain name variations of their chosen website domain name e.g. Wikileaks.com or WikiLeak.org - not acceptable for a global organisation / brand name.
  • Lack of multiple offsite encrypted data backups leading to a Single Point of Failure
  • The whole WiikiLeaks versus OpenLeaks media propaganda and potentially libelous accusations via Twitter and via third party websites and blogs, but still no relevant Press Releases on the "official" WikiLeaks.ch website at all.
  • The incompetent re-use of the encryption password to a full unredacted copy of the whole US Embassy Cables file cables.csv and the failure to accept any blame for publishing this on peer to peer networks via BitTorrent themselves
Personal tools