Forgot your password?
typodupeerror
Censorship United States Your Rights Online

WikiLeaks Under Denial of Service Attack 870

Posted by samzenpus
from the good-timing dept.
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."
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

WikiLeaks Under Denial of Service Attack

Comments Filter:
  • attacked by whom? (Score:3, Informative)

    by Sprouticus (1503545) on Sunday November 28, 2010 @02:44PM (#34366174)

    So who OTHER than the US government could be responsible for the attack?

    • by Anonymous Coward on Sunday November 28, 2010 @02:45PM (#34366184)

      The aliens that don't want the notes of the US ambassador to the intergalactic union to be published.

    • by Anonymous Coward on Sunday November 28, 2010 @02:48PM (#34366222)

      It's always a possibility that they're doing it themselves/hired people to do it in order to drum up business. I mean, Assange loves playing the victim card all the time - it's not much of a stretch to imagine WikiLeaks DDOSing themselves just for the publicity.

    • by 93 Escort Wagon (326346) on Sunday November 28, 2010 @02:48PM (#34366224)

      So who OTHER than the US government could be responsible for the attack?

      The answer to your question is actually posted right under the story above, under "Related Stories"...

      "WikiLeaks Under Denial of Service Attack by wiredmikey (1824622)"

  • Secrecy (Score:5, Interesting)

    by thehostiles (1659283) on Sunday November 28, 2010 @02:46PM (#34366196)

    "lives at risk" "threaten global counterterrorism operations" and "jeopardize us relations" all sounds like politicianese for "we really fucked up and don't want anybody to know about it"

    Whatever happened to justice against people who commit (war) crimes?

    • Re:Secrecy (Score:5, Insightful)

      by MadTinfoilHatter (940931) on Sunday November 28, 2010 @02:51PM (#34366286)

      Whatever happened to justice against people who commit (war) crimes?

      That "justice" only ever existed for the war criminals on the losing side. Silly.

    • Re: Secrecy (Score:5, Insightful)

      by Black Parrot (19622) on Sunday November 28, 2010 @03:38PM (#34366804)

      Whatever happened to justice against people who commit (war) crimes?

      Apparently it's not a crime if the President of a superpower authorizes it.

      We've consistently imprisoned people for waterboarding since the Spanish-American war. We convicted Japanese for it after WWII. We convicted our own troops for using it in Viet Nam. And we've even put some civilian law enforcement officers in prison for using it in Texas.

      But suddenly it's OK...

      Bet it wouldn't be OK if someone did it to our troops.

  • Countless? (Score:5, Funny)

    by mangu (126918) on Sunday November 28, 2010 @02:48PM (#34366226)

    the Obama administration says will put 'countless' lives at risk

    Who would have guessed the US military has aleph-one [wikipedia.org] people working for it?

  • Possible attacker (Score:5, Informative)

    by kju (327) * on Sunday November 28, 2010 @02:48PM (#34366232)

    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]

  • Funny stuff. (Score:4, Interesting)

    by Anonymous Coward on Sunday November 28, 2010 @02:48PM (#34366234)

    "and jeopardize US relations with its allies"
    Wiki leaks is just releasing information.. sounds like to me they're doing things the other countries wouldn't approve of; thus ruining relations. So they don't want anyone to know about what they ( the U.S. ) does in secret.. BUT If someone is willing to expose such information, they blame it on the site. lol~

    It's like a kid stealing from a store and his brother that was with him tells on him, then the kid who stole blames it on his brother for telling everyone what he did. /laugh

  • Publicity stunt? (Score:3, Insightful)

    by Corbets (169101) on Sunday November 28, 2010 @02:49PM (#34366250) Homepage

    It seems highly unlikely that the US government would do something like this. A DoS attack is temporary, and only calls attention to Wikileaks. It seems to me that two other options are more plausible:

    1) Self-proclaimed patriots doing a little wannabe-vigilantiasm.
    2) Mr. "Personality" Assange has arranged for a publicity stunt. After all, if he can make it look like the big bad US is trying to stop him, and he still manages to leak the data, he can further his self-promotion as a hero.

    I guess time will tell, though.

    • Re: (Score:3, Insightful)

      by KliX (164895)

      You'd have to be borderline retarded to think it was a publicity stunt. It's pissed off american teenagers, simple as that.

    • no (Score:3, Interesting)

      by unity100 (970058)
      The documents are already released. it has been approx 10 hours or more.

      ddosing RIGHT at the time news is fresh, would eliminate a lot of casual readers interested in the material only temporarily.
  • RT (Score:5, Insightful)

    by Anonymous Coward on Sunday November 28, 2010 @02:50PM (#34366266)

    DavidWaldock David Waldock
    Dear government: as you keep telling us, if you've done nothing wrong, you've got nothing to fear #wikileaks

    Thought it was worth sharing.

  • by funkatron (912521) on Sunday November 28, 2010 @02:53PM (#34366306)

    Drop the fucking paranoia. It's old. It's boring. It's see through. Stuff like this:

    the Obama administration says will put 'countless' lives at risk, threaten global counterterrorism operations and jeopardize US relations with its allies

    doesn't win sympathy. It merely shows your inability to come up with relevant points to put in a press release. Who on earth do you think believes it?

    Sorry for rant but I've seen this from US politicians, from UK politicians and from European politicians; I'm sick of this crap.

  • by Whammy666 (589169) on Sunday November 28, 2010 @02:54PM (#34366320) Homepage
    The leaks are not the problem. The root of the problem is the hypocritical policies and unsavory conduct that the leaks are exposing. The best way to keep your dirty laundry from being aired is to not engage in dirty conduct in the first place.
    • Re: (Score:3, Interesting)

      by Ironchew (1069966)

      Exactly this.
      The policies themselves are the dangers to human lives. Wikileaks exists to make sure this stuff gets out while the responsible parties can still be held accountable.

    • Re: (Score:3, Interesting)

      by xigxag (167441)

      Listen to yourself. You don't understand your own metaphor. The reason why it's called "dirty laundry" is because it's unsavory but nevertheless unavoidable - we all have it and do our best to conceal it from company.

      All facets of life involve keeping secrets. You don't want your doctor telling your friends or your employer nd family about your STDs. You don't want your shrink telling your parents all those dreams you had about killing them. You don't want your best friend telling your girlfriend about

  • by OzPeter (195038) on Sunday November 28, 2010 @02:55PM (#34366328)
    If what they release is to highlight illegal activity. However I draw the line at releasing documents that are the politicians equivalent of a drunken conversation at a frat party.
    • Re: (Score:3, Interesting)

      by funkatron (912521)

      However I draw the line at releasing documents that are the politicians equivalent of a drunken conversation at a frat party.

      If I understand frat parties correctly, the conversations aren't usually acted on the next day. Can't say the same for this stuff. There's a couple of interesting bits in there but there's also a lot of stuff everyone already knew; US arming Isreal - no shit Sherlock. I'm waiting for the editing and summaries right now.

    • Re: (Score:3, Insightful)

      by John Hasler (414242)

      However I draw the line at releasing documents that are the politicians equivalent of a drunken conversation at a frat party.

      I don't. The fact that politicians frequently behave like drunken frat boys should be highlighted at every opportunity.

    • by qmaqdk (522323) on Sunday November 28, 2010 @03:27PM (#34366662)

      I don't think an official document telling the US diplomats to "obtain not just information from the people they meet, but personal details, such as frequent flyer numbers, credit card details and even DNA material" counts as a drunken conversation at a frat party.

  • by M. Baranczak (726671) on Sunday November 28, 2010 @03:01PM (#34366410)

    Quoth the BBC: [bbc.co.uk]

    The UK Ministry of Defence has urged newspaper editors to "bear in mind" the national security implications of publishing the information.

    You can make a plausible case that the leaks will put lives at risk. But warning the media about publishing excerpts after the stuff is already made public? That's got fuck all to do with national security, that's politicians worrying about public relations.

  • "Expected" Release ? (Score:5, Interesting)

    by unity100 (970058) on Sunday November 28, 2010 @03:19PM (#34366586) Homepage Journal
    It was released at 05.00 Hours.

    i even submitted its article on wikileaks site. All the info regarding the US Afghan war logs were up in a SEARCHABLE and browseable directory. (A good implementation i might add).

    Yet, the news of the release, by me or by any other submitter, were not published in slashdot, but, the ddos for the 'release' that was 'anticipated' has been.

    The train has long left the station.
  • by 93 Escort Wagon (326346) on Sunday November 28, 2010 @03:23PM (#34366626)

    I wasn't sure what to expect - but it sure seems like the sole purpose of this release was to embarrass the United States. I don't see anything that is particularly beneficial to the public here - and isn't that purportedly why WikiLeaks exists? This seems more along the lines of Paris Hilton's ex-boyfriend publicizing his sex tapes.

    Maybe it's not a vendetta, even if it looks like one though. WikiLeaks hasn't really lived up to its promise, all in all. I suspect this may be no more than Assange trying to fend off irrelevancy.

  • Sure? (Score:5, Insightful)

    by Burnhard (1031106) on Sunday November 28, 2010 @03:26PM (#34366648)
    Is it an actual attack, or have they just given the entire world a heads-up that they're going to release some sensational information and so have far more traffic than their servers can handle?
  • by Animats (122034) on Sunday November 28, 2010 @04:38PM (#34367496) Homepage

    The document are out, and The New York Times is already reporting on the good stuff. [nytimes.com]

    One of the more embarrassing items is this: American officials sharply warned Germany in 2007 not to enforce arrest warrants for Central Intelligence Agency officers involved in a bungled operation in which an innocent German citizen with the same name as a suspected militant was mistakenly kidnapped and held for months in Afghanistan. A senior American diplomat told a German official "that our intention was not to threaten Germany, but rather to urge that the German government weigh carefully at every step of the way the implications for relations with the U.S."

  • by bkmoore (1910118) on Sunday November 28, 2010 @04:38PM (#34367498)
    This latest leak is probably the reason the US has been debating about having some kind of "internet kill switch."

Facts are stubborn, but statistics are more pliable.

Working...