Slashdot Mirror


OpenLeaks Founder 'Crippled' WikiLeaks

SETIGuy writes "Former WikiLeaks programmer Daniel Domscheit-Berg sabotaged WikiLeaks in a manner that threatens the anonymity of leakers, according to a WikiLeaks spokesperson. Since leaving WikiLeaks, Domschiet-Berg has become one of the cofounders of OpenLeaks. This raises the question: if you had material to leak, would you trust it to someone who has already jeopardized the anonymity of leakers at a site where he worked?" Domscheit-Berg denies claims by WikiLeaks that he damaged the organization or 'stole' material, but did say he took roughly 300,000 documents with him when he left. An anonymous reader notes related news that WikiLeaks is attempting to get around donation blocks by selling a line of T-shirts.

7 of 278 comments (clear)

  1. Bitter from competition? by Stregano · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Now that WikiLeaks has competition, it would make sense to try and stop that competition. When you have a site like OpenLeaks that is all about anonymously leaking information, trying to say that they are not trusted with that would possibly hurt them. I think it is good there are multiple sources doing this. I don't see what WikiLeaks problem is with it. If they are truly in this to spread information to the masses, then the more sites that do it, the easier it will be for the information to get released.

    --
    The world is how you make it
    1. Re:Bitter from competition? by Monkeedude1212 · · Score: 4, Insightful

      I don't see what WikiLeaks problem is with it. If they are truly in this to spread information to the masses, then the more sites that do it, the easier it will be for the information to get released.

      All the more evidence to suggest that either
      A) Wikileaks is right in that Domscheit-Berg sabatoged Wikileaks and they don't want you to trust him
      B) Wikileaks is not truly in this to spread information to the masses.

    2. Re:Bitter from competition? by icebike · · Score: 4, Insightful

      The fact that Wkileaks is making a big deal of the stolen stash of documents suggest they are NOT in this to provide information, but rather to further a specific agenda.

      Forget for a moment about the irony of bickering over "ownership" of stolen documents. The fact that Wikileaks still HAS a copy of those documents means they weren't harmed.

      As for the anonymous submission system being deactivated, the story seems long on allegations and short on detail. Even the alleged sabotage is only Wikileaks characterization of what is in Domscheit-Berg's book:

      "In (his) book Domscheit-Berg confesses to various acts of sabotage against the organization. The former WikiLeaks staffer admits to having damaged the site's primary submission system and stolen material," Hrafnsson's statement said.

      --
      Sig Battery depleted. Reverting to safe mode.
    3. Re:Bitter from competition? by BlackSabbath · · Score: 4, Insightful

      If having multiple avenues for whistleblowing is good for humanity then I'm afraid Domshit-Berg doesn't agree with you as he very handily sabotaged WL before taking 300K documents and setting up his own tent across the street.

      In Australia, this behaviour is colloquially referred to as a "c*nt's act".

      You claim that WL hasn't acted like a "normal charitable organisation". I'm sorry? What? They are an organisation trying to change the way governments (of all flavours) deal with their citizenry - i.e. they want to make it impossible for governments to continue to operate on the basis of subterfuge on a grand scale. Capitalizing on controversy is part and parcel of making people (not just geeks) aware. Tell me, how many people on the street had even heard of WL 2 years ago, let alone were aware of the stuff they had released?

      As for making a "profitable business" - give me a break. From what? Selling t-shirts? Do you have any idea how much it takes to fund a decent legal defence when multiple state actors are out to get you? I don't either but it sure as hell won't be cheap.

    4. Re:Bitter from competition? by Belial6 · · Score: 4, Insightful

      I don't particularly agree with your statement as a whole, but calling him "paranoid" is just plain bizarre. The guy has multiple world powers out to get him. It isn't that he THINKS they are out to get him, they are publicly stating that they are. Thinking that governments are out to get you when they publicly say so isn't exactly what I would call 'paranoid'.

  2. Re:Wikileaks bitter about stolen documents? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 4, Insightful

    No, learn to read. Wikileaks doesn't care about who copies the documents, they are angry because he sabotaged their submission system.

  3. Re:There are limits... by spun · · Score: 4, Insightful

    There are limits, and an ex associate of Assange's claims he broke those limits. Maybe he did, maybe he didn't, we don't know. How do we know Assange is the wingnut, and not Domscheit-Berg? It's pretty clear that at least one of them is a monomaniacal loon, if not both.

    --
    - None can love freedom heartily, but good men; the rest love not freedom, but license. -- John Milton