wikileaks and what the fucks

coderman coderman at
Thu Jan 11 03:33:26 PST 2007

so i'm a little late to the drama party [0], but enjoying the
entertainment none the less.

a few things are particularly amusing, including the email header, no
doubt sailing across a multitude of narus taps in plaintext, forever
tying the WL alias to it's intended subject,

This is a restricted internal development mailinglist for
Please do not mention that word directly in these discussions; refer
instead to 'WL'.

as well as a dollar figure behind the psyphon scam, US $3,000,000
dollars, no doubt rationally allocated to posturing and vaporware
rather than extending existing best of class solutions. (Tor needs
help, in case people haven't noticed :)

so much talk of security, social network analysis, urgent privacy [1],
and not a single link to SNA avoiding Tor/i2p routing?  i'm not one to
harsh on the merits of a nice session layer, but when it clearly
addresses only half of the stated equation, the implications are not
positive. (to be fair, the wikileaks faq and links remedy this [2])

there is lots of talk of super architecture, "WikiLeaks integrates
technologies including modified versions of FreeNet, Tor, PGP and
software of our own design." [3] but very little details.  a freenet
and Tor combo would seem to accentuate the deficiencies of each, but
perhaps my ignorance is overly jaded.  i hope an infrastructure
entrusted with critical privacy will display the necessary
transparency required for reasonable trust when launched.

some interesting bits are also found within, with this judicial
position making me wonder when they'll come no-knocking for cable
plats and transit schedules:

"""Although existing authorities do not directly address the subject,
it appears that reasonable restrictions upon the possession and
dissemination of catastrophically dangerous information can be
constitutionally implemented," suggests Stewart Harris of the
Appalachian School of Law. See "Restrictions are justifiable,"
National Law Journal, December 11, 2006.
(one day you may need a license for intelligence and autonomy! now
take your pills and report to your cube...)

and nothing makes me chuckle like some fiat ethics:
"1. Ethics. We favour, and uphold, ethical behaviour in all circumstances."

(a good example, like Ellsberg/pentagon papers mentioned in detail
later, is a much better representation of the ethical reasoning

did they take up your suggestion, JYA?
"""If fleecing the CIA is the purpose, I urge setting a much higher
funding goal, in the $100M range and up."""

keep "losing it", John.  may your age related dementia continue for
many score... *grin*

0. WikiLeaks

1. riseup security overview and measures

2. WikiLeaks Links (heheh, sorry, i need sleep. but try and say it out
loud, i dare you!)
   [i2p, pgp, privoxy, freenet, gnupg, Tor]

3. WikiLeaks FAQ

99. someone inevitably wonders why i'm geeking out on privacy from a
gmail account.  lest you question my sanity (it's eroded in different
dimensions), i have no expectation of privacy from plaintext nor
hosted service.  Tor is a minimum best effort, and in reality it takes
more skill and effort than most have at their disposal (for now).  so
i tentatively concur with this advice, unless you know enough and are
skilled enough to know your known unknowns and your unknown unknowns
(ah, such wisdom, rummy!):
"""The Internet is a spying machine and no use of it free of
surveillance is possible due to the system's design to allow
continuous monitoring by service providers, website operators,
security peddlers and government communications regulators across and
up and down the transmission stream. Hazards planted in users' boxes
are the least threat compared to the Internet's inherent capability of
siphoning and archiving data at multiples points without users'
knowledge or control. Any website privacy policy which promises
protection is a lie, same for any communications or government

More information about the cypherpunks-legacy mailing list