Infiltration/Exfiltration

[Anonymous Remailer (austria)]

On 01/20/2014 09:17 AM, John Young wrote:
> This how Cryptome got its first contributions from this cave. And
> still does along with a long list of others. WikiLeaks and Snowden
> the best yelled about, but far from disclosing the most information
> which is done quietly and without "batshit" hyperbole and vulgar
> braggardy.

I'm talking about something slightly different here. With most of the
information on Cryptome, it looks like someone came across some
information and decided to exfiltrate it. They probably weren't
deliberately looking for it or had joined the agency for the specific
purpose of having access to and leaking such information.  

In this case, I'm talking about actual infiltration: going in with the
explicit purpose of betraying the secrecy of the organization and
getting valuable data out of it.

> Claims of needing journalism and slow drips to hold public attention
> are merely monetizing justifications. Biblical fundamentalism.

I too wish the leaks would come at a faster pace. But I don't think
Snowden posting the leaks to, say, an FTP server somewhere would have
got any response. There are too many leaks with too much technical
jargon. Joe Average would have given up after the first four pages. What
the Guardian and other media outlets are doing is making the information
more accessible to people. I wish they'd do it more quickly, yes, but I
do think there is some value in what they're doing.

> And may be much worse, as in the Snowden case, a rationale
> for not releasing information except to a few selected abusers,
> journalistic, technical and political "freedom of informaton." In
> the bogosity of "doing no harm to national security" just like
> secretkeepers who use that exact lingo.

I'll admit here that I am not someone who believes that there should be
no secrets. I do believe keeping certain things secret, at least for a
little while, has value. But those things should respect civil and human
rights and adhere to the principles of the Constitution.  In too many
cases, Snowden and Ellsberg being prime examples, official secrecy was
used for no other reason than to cover up wrongdoing.  The "national
security" bullshit was just that - bullshit because they could.

That's why I think we need more deliberate infiltrators. People who are
well versed in the Constitution with a strong bend for civil and human
rights. People who don't buy into the bullshit but also see value in
some of the work being done. Someone who can filter through that and
find what needs to be exposed while still protecting what shouldn't be.