tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5235419263414453422.post8716433637615912894..comments2024-02-23T01:30:06.101-08:00Comments on Early Warning: Wikileaks LatestStuart Stanifordhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/07182839827506265860noreply@blogger.comBlogger8125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5235419263414453422.post-36806671690824825142010-12-04T11:32:36.412-08:002010-12-04T11:32:36.412-08:00Stuart,
In light of the continued attacks on Wiki...Stuart,<br /><br />In light of the continued attacks on Wikileaks, and your experience in the computer security field, I wonder if you have any thoughts on the viability of this organization, and the ability of presumably powerful interests to stop them?Garyhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/08580497879135994296noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5235419263414453422.post-46620307152648805042010-11-29T22:44:04.135-08:002010-11-29T22:44:04.135-08:00I guess I'm the only one who considers this le...I guess I'm the only one who considers this leak interesting only in that it sparks discussion and news. Realistically, I don't think much was harmed, because those involved already know about and expect all of the things reported. The only thing wounded by this particular batch of leaks so far is the pride of the powerful. Seriously, the Arab states hate and distrust Iran? Is this news? Nearly every country wants somebody else to "do something" about Iran, but is unwilling to attack themselves! Diplomats are also spies! Are these items even remotely shocking? Embarrassing, yes, but hardly near as harmful as they are being blown up to be. Even the last leak (the Afghan war logs) sparked brief discussion followed by a massive yawn - it had no lasting political effects at all that I can discern, and even the US military and intelligence organizations can't point to any specific harms, and that leak was much more ethically questionable.<br /><br />Wikileaks is doing a useful service of humbling the powerful and shedding light on the realities of politics. I do think their recent focus on the US government has been somewhat overdone, but then it's what has made their name, despite the long history of incredible leaks they have published from around the world (and mostly greeted with a yawn).<br /><br />Wikileaks is not a morally pure organization, but their work is necessary, at least as necessary as the work of diplomats... It is absolutely essential for the powerful to be exposed in order for any semblance of equality, liberty, and democracy to exist. If the people are in the dark about real politics, they are very easily controlled.Adam Schuetzlerhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/07447074170522503338noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5235419263414453422.post-73127833409075459972010-11-29T19:01:00.402-08:002010-11-29T19:01:00.402-08:00Some of the leaked cables reveal stuff that has po...Some of the leaked cables reveal stuff that has positive possibilities:<br /><br /><a href="http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/middleeast/iran/8168672/WikiLeaks-Ayatollah-Khameni-has-terminal-cancer.html" rel="nofollow">WikiLeaks: Ayatollah Khameni has terminal cancer</a><br /><br /><a href="http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2010/nov/29/wikileaks-cables-china-reunified-korea" rel="nofollow">Wikileaks cables reveal China 'ready to abandon North Korea'</a>Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5235419263414453422.post-38976225145882607652010-11-29T18:08:32.482-08:002010-11-29T18:08:32.482-08:00@"Wikileaks has lost my support at this point...@"Wikileaks has lost my support at this point. What is the point of their operation?"<br /><br />Yo. Methinks I'll wait a bit. <br /><br />Wikileaks pledged today their next round is Wall Street. Now that might be terrific fun.Brian Hayeshttps://www.blogger.com/profile/07685476905189798246noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5235419263414453422.post-21841622586015324152010-11-29T15:23:35.600-08:002010-11-29T15:23:35.600-08:00What would be the effect of a nuclear attack on th...What would be the effect of a nuclear attack on the Ghawar oil field? <br /><br />An econ text from a course I took in the mid 80s mentioned in passing the possibility of natural resources being destroyed in place at huge scale.<br /><br />Might take KSA out of the picture rather rapidly. The US is not going to nuke Tehran in retaliation. Russia would be helped by the huge rise in oil prices. Might not be that bad for China either.<br /><br />It's also possible the resource would not be destroyed, just inaccessible for years.<br /><br />War is a deeply technical business and full of surprises. The Cold War was very fluid beneath the surface at times. I can't imagine it being a stable conflict in the the cramped Middle East.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5235419263414453422.post-78991335150294241002010-11-29T12:37:06.524-08:002010-11-29T12:37:06.524-08:00To be fair to the US government, none of the stuff...To be fair to the US government, none of the stuff that was leaked in the Cables is rated "Top Secret". The worst it gets is "Confidential/NOFORN" or "Secret/NOFORN". That's probably part of the reason why Manning had access.Bretthttps://www.blogger.com/profile/05741738070067590221noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5235419263414453422.post-9227557651883699832010-11-29T09:48:46.071-08:002010-11-29T09:48:46.071-08:00- There aren't many PFC intelligence analysts,...- There aren't many PFC intelligence analysts, or PFCs with top-secret clearance, either. Manning seems to have slipped through their psychological profiling. It doesn't look like any other top-secret holders did anything like this, or we would have had leaks before. It's much harder to secure a system from a motivated insider than from the outside. <br /><br />- I'd say it's crazy for them to do all of that through one secure network. Manning was a military analyst in Iraq. He <i>should</i> have had access to military intelligence about Iraq, to do his job. State Department transmissions should have used a separate network that this guy had no access to. <br /><br />- Looks to me like Stuxnet <b><i>was</i></b> the attack, and was probably successful at setting back the Iranian program a year or two. Hopefully, while it was sabotaging the Iraqi centrifuges, it was also collecting data that can be used for future attacks. It's a much better method than airstrikes.<br /><br />- The best case scenario in the Middle East is for Iran's government to be overthrown by moderates and turned into a Democracy, and for a two-state solution for Israel/Palestine. (I'm still hoping for those :-) Of course, the best case scenario for the OECD is to move away from oil before the Middle East gets worse. The <i>most likely</i> solution is a cold war in the Middle East.kjmclarkhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/00490417628052004621noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5235419263414453422.post-91618737654493199422010-11-29T09:30:59.620-08:002010-11-29T09:30:59.620-08:00Wikileaks has lost my support at this point. What ...Wikileaks has lost my support at this point. What is the point of their operation? Is it to expose everyone else's secret information, but not their own? Do they not rely on secrecy for their own operations? Are they not at this point becoming a non-state cyber-military threat to the US, if not to others? <br /><br />The question is whom they attack. Are they attacking worthy targets, or exposing secrets just because they can? The original idea was to help whistleblowers expose corruption, and we are all on board on that, I think.<br /><br />If Wikileaks devotes itself to taking down the US particularly, it has become an adversarial entity. For all the problems of our country & government, it remains the expression of our (American's) collective needs, diplomatic, security, etc. If Wikileaks fails to exercise basic curatorial / editorial responsibility, it will rightfully be a target for adverse attack from us in turn.Burkhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/11158223475895530397noreply@blogger.com