WikiLeaks Published Rape Victims' Names, Credit Cards, Medical Data (arstechnica.com)

Joe Mullin, writing for ArsTechnica: Even as WikiLeaks founder Julian Assange sits trapped in the Ecuadorean embassy, the WikiLeaks website continues to publish the secrets of various governments worldwide. But that's not all it's publishing. A report today by the Associated Press highlights citizens who had "sensitive family, financial or identity records" published by the site. "They published everything: my phone, address, name, details," said one Saudi man whose paternity dispute was revealed in documents published by the site. "If the family of my wife saw this... Publishing personal stuff like that could destroy people." One document dump, from Saudi diplomatic cables, held at least 124 medical files. The files named sick children, refugees, and patients with psychiatric conditions. In one case, the cables included the name of a Saudi who was arrested for being gay. In Saudi Arabia, homosexuality is punishable by death. In two other cases, WikiLeaks published the names of teenage rape victims. "This has nothing to do with politics or corruption," said Dr. Nayef al-Fayez, who had a patient with brain cancer whose personal details were published.

Comments

Re:Pile it on..

[Falconnan]

Well, let's look at this without passion for a moment. If it's true that they released this information on people who were not involved in any variation of corruption, and did so (even without malice) without checking the data for such information, this comes up to gross negligence. Whether we like it or not, some data should remain private. I support the idea that all government activity not directly tied to national security should be publicly accessible, but crime or persecution victims need to be protected.

When we allow "all of the data" to be public, it creates a chilling effect on dissent and discourse. People become afraid to report crimes against their persons. Victimization thrives on access to personal details of private citizens. Let's just call this what it is: A bad idea either way. Real lives can be shattered by this type of thing. Innocent lives. I generally support the stated goals of Wikileaks, but complete lack of discretion helps no cause.

Re:All the data means all the data

[Anonymous Coward]

Publishing someone's medical records without their consent is against the law in practically every country in the world. Leaking medical records of ordinary citizens has nothing to do with transparency. It's against the law, period.

Re:Maybe Wikileaks is the wrong entity to be angry

[Anonymous Coward]

Maybe we should be angry that this type of sensitive information is in diplomatic cables. Why are medical records, credit card info and other stuff being stored and transmitted by government agents in the first place?

Most likely they are assisting people who became sick way from their home country. Are you bothered by the government helping people?

Re:Maybe Wikileaks is the wrong entity to be angry

[Quantus347]

Why wouldn't they? If, for example, I was mugged (say, both robbed and say beaten with a stick) in a foreign country, I could fully expect the police report to end up in a diplomatic transmission, which would include the stolen identity/credit card information as well as the medical records that described my injuries. Crimes against foreign nationals would often go though the State Department and whatever equivalent the other nation had.

I dont know the circumstances of all the cases described in these cases, but there are plenty of reasonable and legal reasons for a government body to have that information that does not involve Big Brother spying.

Wikileaks absolutely does "vetting" ...

[drnb]

I was not aware they ever did any vetting, and if they did, what their standard of care was

Wikileaks absolutely does "vetting" and "curation". They will edit things to remove facts contrary to the narrative they wish to promote. For example when US helicopters kill some journalists in Iraq they will remove the early parts of the video showing these journalists traveling down the street with a group of armed militants only blocks from where US ground forces are engaged in combat.

Re:Wikileaks absolutely does "vetting" ...

[lars_stefan_axelsson]

For example when US helicopters kill some journalists in Iraq they will remove the early parts of the video showing these journalists traveling down the street with a group of armed militants only blocks from where US ground forces are engaged in combat.

And whether that's true or not isn't even the point. It's not the journalists we care about in that encounter. Shit happens in war, and it's difficult to tell from the photos. No, it's the helicopter crew lying to their chain of command to receive permission to fire on the van, in clear violation of both international law and the US own rules of engagement at the time that we think is beyond the pale.

Re:All the data means all the data

[rahvin112]

Your evidence is as strong as the evidence that "the jews control the media" because some CEO of a public company has a jewish last name. Someone jumping between government appointments and the press is NOT new, what do you think political consultants are? I personally think they should change their title to out of work politician. Do you expect presidents to hire non journalists for a press secretary position?

Seriously you act like you expect people to have a special job called presidential press secretary, even though there is only one of them and they change with every president and that after they leave they should never ever work again and certainly not in the press. After all they are just robots with no independent thought and are just arms of some giant presidential monster. In other words your argument is childish and devoid of reality.

Re:Criminal

[Dangerous_Minds]

Wikileaks has responded to these allegations:

"No, WikiLeaks did not disclose "gays" to the Saudi govt. Data is from govt & not leaked by us. Story from 2015. Re-run now due to election."