The Dim-Post

August 2, 2010

On the secrecy of Wikileaks

Filed under: technology,us politics — danylmc @ 10:23 am

Daniel Ellsberg makes an interesting point in an Economist interview:

I would’ve thought that the National Security Agency could penetrate them and keep them from giving anonymity to leakers. We pay an awful lot to the NSA to spy on us—since 9/11—and on other people, and I supposed they were up to the task of denying secure communications to Wikileaks. But the administration’s surprise at these revelations indicates that Julian Assange is delivering to sources what he said he could—anonymity. And the reason that one person has been brought up on charges, Bradley Manning, is not due to any fault in the Wikileaks technology, but to Bradley Manning’s own choice to reveal himself to someone who in turn informed on him. So I hope that his being under charges won’t discourage other people from using the Wikileaks technology. I understand that Assange has offered, or plans to offer, this same technology or software to newspapers so that they can do Wikileaks’s job on a larger scale. And I hope they take advantage of that.

When you set up a government department with no oversight, no accountability and no objective outcomes to measure it by you get (a) the least competent organisation imaginable and (b) an intelligence agency.

About these ads

5 Comments »

  1. I don’t recall where I read it, but I thought that wikileaks got most of its information the old-fashioned way – not by email, but in the post.

    Comment by Graeme Edgeler — August 2, 2010 @ 10:51 am

  2. When you set up a government department with no oversight, no accountability and no objective outcomes to measure it by you get

    (a) the least competent organisation imaginable
    (b) an intelligence agency
    (c) Whanau Ora
    (d) all of the above

    d.

    Comment by andy (the other one) — August 2, 2010 @ 11:01 am

  3. I’m not sure even the NSA has the clout to fuck with Sweden’s internet…

    Comment by dontsurf — August 2, 2010 @ 11:14 am

  4. IMHO the NSA and its colonial affiliates have not been able to read correctly implemented commercial crypto for some years.

    That’s based on two things: firstly, if the systems were breakable, the breaks would have individually been found by open researchers.

    Secondly, there has been no massive bank/payment fraud by an NSA staffer using their systems to steal credentials.

    Comment by rich — August 3, 2010 @ 3:36 pm

  5. “Secondly, there has been no massive bank/payment fraud by an NSA staffer using their systems to steal credentials.”

    Citation needed.

    Comment by Pascal's bookie — August 3, 2010 @ 3:44 pm


RSS feed for comments on this post. TrackBack URI

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s

The Rubric Theme. Create a free website or blog at WordPress.com.

Follow

Get every new post delivered to your Inbox.

Join 420 other followers

%d bloggers like this: