Wikileaks - India

[Husky]

[quote name='Mudy' date='05 September 2011 - 10:30 AM' timestamp='1315198326' post='112724']

wiki leaks links are not working.

Any links to working site?

[/quote]



Does it work now?

http://wikileaks.org/cablegate.html



Left column says:

Currently released so far... 251287 / 251,287

At the bottom of the cablegate page is the downloads section:

Downloads

Click here to download full site in single archive.

[...]

And that first links to: 88.80.16.63/torrent/cablegate/cablegate-[color="#0000FF"]20110830[/color]0212.7z.torrent

So the torrent appears dated 30 Aug 2011.



Which means it may or may not contain the latest, since the Guardian published the following on the 1st Sep (2 calendar days later):

http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2011/sep...les-online

Unredacted US embassy cables available online after WikiLeaks breach

Guardian denies allegation in WikiLeaks statement that journalist disclosed passwords to archive

James Ball The Guardian,

[color="#0000FF"]Thursday 1 September 2011[/color]

http://www.smh.com.au/world/nothing-left...1jxn0.html

Nothing left to leak?

September 8, 2011



WikiLeaks' controversial release of secret US cables shook politics and diplomacy everywhere. But is it now a spent force? Philip Dorling reports.



ONE figure says it all. On the WikiLeaks website's ''Secret United States Embassy cables'' page, an inconspicuous counter reads: ''Currently released so far … 251,287/251,287'', which means that all of the US diplomatic cables leaked to the whistleblower group founded by Australian Julian Assange are now posted on the world wide web.

This bit is interesting (and relevant to the subtitle to the Guardian link):

Assange nonetheless felt duty bound to adhere to the process of slowly vetting the cables, with WikiLeaks either making its own judgments or drawing on advice from its media partners to identify sensitive information and recommend redactions and deletions from the published texts.



That has now all changed following the dramatic disclosure last week that the entire US cables database could be found on the internet in an encrypted file that could be opened with a password published in a book by Guardian journalists David Leigh and Luke Harding.



Who is responsible for this extraordinary security lapse is hotly disputed between Assange and The Guardian.



But having witnessed The Guardian's dealings with WikiLeaks at a meeting in London last November, I was appalled at the newspaper's treatment of the group that delivered it such an astonishing bounty of information. The personal contempt of senior Guardian journalists for Assange - whom one referred to as ''a source, nothing more'' - was all too clear.



Against that background, I found it unsurprising that The Guardian ignored Assange's most basic security instructions - never reveal the key to encrypted material that is or has been, however fleetingly, publicly available - and it must bear ultimate responsibility for the leak of the entire unredacted database.



In these circumstances, Assange's decision last Friday to publish the US cable archives on the WikiLeaks website may well have conformed with his personal inclinations, but it was also entirely justified.



Thanks to The Guardian, the horse had bolted, not merely into the next paddock but around the globe.



Assange set out his reasoning in media interviews this week: it was a simple fact that the cables were already circulating widely online after their location and the link with the published password had been identified and disseminated, allegedly by former WikiLeaks member Daniel Domscheit-Berg.



''Let us look at this case properly,'' Assange said, ''The Guardian newspaper revealed the entire encryption password including that component they were instructed never to write about, and did so in breach of their contract.''

However, as federal Attorney-General Robert McClelland's resumption of verbal hostilities confirmed last week, the federal government has no sympathy for Assange and may go out of its way to make his life uncomfortable.



[color="#0000FF"]But more seriously, nearly a year after critical software was removed by Domscheit-Berg and another WikiLeaks defector, WikiLeaks' confidential submission mechanism remains out of action.[/color]

Assange says the facility will be up and running soon and that WikiLeaks has more startling information in its secure servers, but this remains to be seen.

http://wikileaks.org/

Bank of America using Private Intel Firms to Attack Wikileaks

[color="#0000FF"]2011-02-02[/color]

In a document titled "The WikiLeaks Threat" three data intelligence companies, Plantir Technologies, HBGary Federal and Berico Technologies, outline [color="#0000FF"]a plan to attack Wikileaks[/color]. They are acting upon request from Hunton and Williams, [color="#0000FF"]a law firm working for Bank of America. The Department of Justice recommended the law firm to Bank of America[/color] according to an article in The Tech Herald. The prosed attacks on WikiLeaks according to the slides include these actions:

• Feed the fuel between the feuding groups. Disinformation. Create messages around actions of sabotage or discredit the opposing organizations. Submit fake documents and then call out the error.
  
  
• Create concern over the security of the infrastructure. Create exposure stories. If the process is believed not to be secure they are done.
  
  
• Cyber attacks against the infrastructure to get data on document submitters. This would kill the project. Since the servers are now in Sweden and France putting a team together to get access is more straightforward.
  
  
• Media campaign to push the radial and reckless nature of WikiLeaks activities. Sustain pressure. Does nothing for the fanatics, but creates concern and doubt among moderates.
  
  
• Search for leaks. Use social media to profile and identify risky behavior of employees.