Cryptome to be Terminated by Verio/NTT

George Maschke writes "Cryptome, a website concerned with encryption, privacy, and government secrecy, has received two weeks' notice from Verio that its service will be terminated for unspecified "violation of [its] Acceptable Use Policy." Cryptome has a history of making publicly available documents and information that governments would rather keep secret. For the notice, and a public response by Cryptome webmaster John Young, see Cryptome Shutdown by Verio/NTT."

any good soul?

[eneville]

Is there anyone who would like to put up some bounty for having this hosted in a country with liberal hosting rules, such as Sweden perhaps?

explination

[Anonymous Coward]

Dont they have to tell you what violation you commited?

Pcik a new ISP

[DogDude]

So a web site has a problem with their ISP. So friggin' what? Pick a different ISP. There are millions of hosting companies out there. Everybody has problems of one kind or another with their web host, and switches. These guys should pick a new ISP and be done with it. I mean, tell people that Verio sucks for these reasons, but there's no reason the web site should shut down permanently... this whole thing sounds like drama for the sake of drama.

Re:Pcik a new ISP

[sphealey]

> So a web site has a problem with their
> ISP. So friggin' what? Pick a different ISP.

Cryptome IS watched by various intelligence, counterintelligence, and law enforcement agencies. Young posted a funny exchange he had once with the "duty officer of the day" at a TLA; the guy told him that a certain document had been released accidently; could it please be withdrawn? Young of course said no, so the guy then said "I guess it is too late for this conversation not to be posted too?" - making it clear that he knew very well how Young runs Cryptome.

So it may be very difficult for him to find another ISP. Maybe one related to Qwest will take him on, but they ISP has to know they WILL come under additional law enforcement pressure just as a result of hosting that site.

sPh

Re:Pcik a new ISP

[Anonymous Coward]

I find it relevant, if only because I'm in a position where I often get to choose where my company hosts servers.

If Verio arbitrarily terminates service to it's customers, I won't be choosing them. And I'll be letting their sales guys know why.

(I certainly get an earful if something I've done loses a sale.)

Logical Consequences.

Oer the land of the unfree and the home of weasels

[Marcion]

So the British "intelligence" services, the same ones that said Saddam Hussein had huge stockpiles of WMD that could strike the UK in 45 minutes, can get a website turned off it America? The ISP just weasely pulls the plug without negotiation just because some guy with a British accent rings up?

Come on America, we all used to look up to you as the beacon of freedom, but now your country is being turned into a Tudor monarchy, within a few years there will be no freedom left, will the last one out please turn off the lights when you leave.

Why he stays in USA

[Frozen Void]

I would suggest he move somewhere safer like Switzerland or Sweden.
This should be done BEFORE making his site.

Re:Move to NearlyFreeSpeech.net

[poopdeville]

I wouldn't go with NearlyFreeSpeech.net. I had a very bad experience with the owner (Jeff) involving sudden cancellation of every account I had ever worked on.

I was a web developer and recommended NFS to many clients because of the pricing structure and Catalyst support. All those accounts were cancelled in an attempt to discredit me professionally. He went as far as to email my then current client to insult me. Of course, I have a hard copy of our email conversation. All my clients moved to DreamHost at my recommendation.

Petty and rigid. In my opinion, the man is autistic. Or at least a Libertarian (though these are synonymous, no?)

Re:Oer the land of the unfree and the home of weas

[Anonymous Coward]

I suspect what happened was that someone in the US government saw something they didn't like, and sent a National Security Letter or other such silliness to Verio.

I bet you're right. I wonder what it was? I'd love to make whoever thought drafting a security letter to Verio to try to suppress it regret having ever drawn additional attention to the matter.

Re:Do NOT - repeatt NOT - Fuck with the Man, man

[Anonymous Coward]

This is sort of relevant to this thread. Yesterday I posted comments on Digg in reply to someone remarking that the Bush administration is rife with people like Tobias showing up in the news over sexual practices. My comment noted that such people are a hazard for security clearances, and since Israel processes all telephone call records, Mossad likely has excellent material to blackmail people in the administration, and Congress, and was likely doing so. They're not fools.

One hour later, my post was pulled by Digg, along with the comment preceding mine and several succeeding comments. I doubt that Digg by itself would have chopped it out, so someone had to have driven the act. Either the Bushites, or even Israeli influence. Possibly, the blackmail theory was true, and dangerous to someone.

Questions...

[sycodon]

For all you Slashdotters out there who lament the loss of this site and future postings of secret documents.

It is obvious that many people believe it is OK to leak secret information as long as it is "for the greater good". But the question of what is the greater good often depends on your political leanings.

So I ask...

What is the greater good?
What kinds of things do you think should not be leaked?
Who do you think has the appropriate knowledge to decide?

And last, what should happen to someone who decides incorrectly?

Discuss among yourselves.