WikiLeaks Under Denial of Service Attack 870
wiredmikey writes "WikiLeaks has reported that its Web site is currently under a mass distributed denial of service attack. The attack comes around the time of an expected release of classified State Department documents, which the Obama administration says will put 'countless' lives at risk, threaten global counterterrorism operations and jeopardize US relations with its allies."
attacked by whom? (Score:3, Informative)
So who OTHER than the US government could be responsible for the attack?
Guardian released leak already (Score:5, Informative)
Possible attacker (Score:5, Informative)
One self proclaimed "Hacktivist for good" claims responsibility for the DoS-Attack: http://twitter.com/th3j35t3r [twitter.com]
He threatened before that he would do that when Wikileaks releases, see last comment on http://th3j35t3r.wordpress.com/2010/09/17/wikileaks-insurance-policy-expired/ [wordpress.com]
Re:Administration has zero credibility (Score:3, Informative)
It's out [guardian.co.uk]
and related picture [apcdn.com]
Re:Guardian released leak already (Score:1, Informative)
If you look at his recent history, there seem to be a whole bunch of reasonable posts modded down to -1. Seems pretty suspicious.
Re:Administration has zero credibility (Score:3, Informative)
Yes, and if you actually had read any of them instead of telling others to read them, you'd realize that in the 70k documents they published the last time there were a total of 3 informant names. One was already dead, one was a double agent and the other no longer relevant.
Re:Administration has zero credibility (Score:5, Informative)
A thorough Department of Defense analysis concluded -- Wikileaks released no sensitive source information, and to date no Afghans have been harmed or threatened from it.
http://www.cnn.com/2010/US/10/16/wikileaks.assessment/index.html?hpt=T2 [cnn.com]
Re:Come on, be serious (Score:3, Informative)
Do you think US "HUMINT requirements" were a secret for any self-respecting foreign espionage agency?
I still fail to see anything that is really damaging to US, except for damage to public opinion (which is low enough already).
Re:These documents should not be released. (Score:5, Informative)
The Iraq and Afghan dumps were only "a little harmful" and barely worthy of classification. These cables, on the other hand, are strategically damaging the U.S., its interests, and its allies. Wikileaks should be exposing corruption, wrongdoing, and illegality. It shouldn't take what appears to all outside observers as a vendetta against the U.S.
You're not making sense, they're exposing corruption, wrongdoing and illegality, and you complain that they're doing it to someone you'd rather think of as uncorrupted. Boohoofuckinghoo.
Re:Administration has zero credibility (Score:3, Informative)
I have read some, and I didn't see any names of informants. Maybe you should point out exactly which cables you are referring to.
Re:These documents should not be released. (Score:4, Informative)
What wikileaks is doing is un-American and is the same as supporting terrorism
tell me what do you classify the things below as :
http://www.thirdworldtraveler.com/US_ThirdWorld/dictators.html [thirdworldtraveler.com]
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Operation_Gladio [wikipedia.org]
dont give us 'supporting terrorism' bullshit.
Re:Come on, be serious (Score:4, Informative)
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Operation_Gladio [wikipedia.org]
http://www.thirdworldtraveler.com/US_ThirdWorld/dictators.html [thirdworldtraveler.com]
i find your ideas disgusting. your place is in 1930s. not 2010.
Re:Administration has zero credibility (Score:4, Informative)
Congratulations! You've identified the difference between "raw" intelligence and intelligence reports. They will indeed have names like "Curveball" in the intelligence reports, but the raw intelligence includes the person's name.
Re:The leaks are not the problem (Score:5, Informative)
Your attitude is naive and idiotic. Regardless of your feelings, there are dangerous and evil men in the world. Overall, The United States is the greatest force for good in this world. The free press has traditionally been an excellent force to keep American voters informed and hold politicians accountable for their actions/policies.
Wikileaks does none of these things. All that Wikileaks does is undermine the efforts of the United States and the West to safeguard and make the world a better place. Make no mistake, these actions strengthen those who stand opposed to us who would like to see their own personal fortunes/power grow at the expense of democratic/free nations.
You may be opposed to specific US/Western policies but, frankly, it's the best we have. Your protests remind me of the Churchill quote: "democracy is the worst form of government except for all of the others".
And this is the reason why drugs are bad...
Re:These documents should not be released. (Score:1, Informative)
Pax Americana? Pax?
You need to learn some history my friend: Iran-contra, Cuba missile crisis, Bay of pigs, Chile assassination of democratically elected Allende and installation of dictator and human rights abuser Pinochet, and hundreds upon hundreds of others.
America isn't interested in peace per se - it's interested in itself and will murder, rape and enslave anything that stands in its way.
Re:These documents should not be released. (Score:5, Informative)
The basic reaction in the german Spiegel forum about the U.S.'s opinion of german politicans was: "Nothing new to see here. Just my opinion being confirmed." I guess this is generally true for most other countries.
Or to put it differently: If the U.S. assessment was widely different from what most people were thinking anyway, I would have been wondering if the U.S. diplomats and the world were living in parallel universes.
Re:I can support Wikileaks (Score:1, Informative)
Go and read the documents yourself, instead of parroting the party line of "to honest to publish" bullshit. Here, I'll even pick one out for you:
"Washington calls for intelligence on top UN officials"
http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/us-embassy-cables-documents/219058 [guardian.co.uk]
A long a well prepared list of which countries and officials are interesting to US intelligence. Requesting phone numbers, credit card numbers, passwords, finger prints, iris scans.
This is not drunken gossip. These are calculated orders for espionage.
Re:The leaks are not the problem (Score:1, Informative)
"The United States is the greatest force for good in this world." - Yeah, tell that to all the innocent civilians you have bombed, the children you have killed, the people you hold without due process of law, the ones you torture, the countries where you overthrow their democratically elected leadership, the people in whose affairs you constantly meddle, the Europeans who now live under absurd laws after pressure from the US...
More people around the world see the USA as a threat to world peace than China or Russia. You may be brainwashed by your media, but the USA is NOT seen as a "force for good". Not at all.
Re:These documents should not be released. (Score:1, Informative)
These cables, on the other hand, are strategically damaging the U.S., its interests, and its allies.
Allies. You mean partners in crime.
Do not forget that wikileaks offered the government an opportunity to sanitize names out of these docs. The gov't refused. So, cut off your nose to spite your face. The gov't turned down a chance to mitigate damages. So if any names are revealed and the named are assassinated, their blood is equally on the hands of anyone who refused the opportunity to get the names redacted.
Re:Administration has zero credibility (Score:3, Informative)
Re:Administration has zero credibility (Score:3, Informative)
It isn't. That stat was presented as the number of people who can get on SIPRNET. But not everyone on SIPRNET has access to the information.
The gentleman who leaked the information [wikipedia.org] was an intelligence analyst. Thus he had access.
Re:These documents should not be released. (Score:3, Informative)