Slashdot Mirror


In a 'Plot Twist', Wikileaks Releases Documents It Claims Detail Russia Mass Surveillance Apparatus (techcrunch.com)

WikiLeaks, believed by many to be a Kremlin front, surprised some observers Tuesday morning (Snowden called it a "plot twist") when it released documents linking a Russian tech company with access to thousands of citizens' telephone and internet communications with Moscow. From a report: Writing a summary of the cache of mostly Russian-language documents, Wikileaks claims they show how a long-established Russian company which supplies software to telcos is also installing infrastructure, under state mandate, that enables Russian state agencies to tap into, search and spy on citizens' digital activity -- suggesting a similar state-funded mass surveillance program to the one utilized by the U.S.'s NSA or by GCHQ in the U.K. (both of which were detailed in the 2013 Snowden disclosures). The documents which Wikileaks has published (there are just 34 "base documents" in this leak) relate to a St. Petersburg-based company, called Peter-Service, which it claims is a contractor for Russian state surveillance. The company was set up in 1992 to provide billing solutions before going on to become a major supplier of software to the mobile telecoms industry.

2 of 168 comments (clear)

  1. I missed a "Kremlim front" thing? Daaaamn. by Cajun+Hell · · Score: 4, Interesting

    WikiLeaks, believed by many to be a Kremlin front

    Whoa! WTF? Not kidding, this is the very first time I have heard this conspiracy theory.

    When you say "many", are you talking about a number of people approximately equal to the number of 9/11-Truthers? Half the number of Obama Birthers? C'mon, put this "many" into the units that we're familiar with, you know, like how you measure hard disks in terms of Libraries of Congress.

    --
    "Believe me!" -- Donald Trump
  2. Does this actually matter? by Okian+Warrior · · Score: 3, Interesting

    I guess he's getting tired of living in his Ecuadorian mom's basement and his 15 minutes of fame are over about an hour ago. Let that co-opted weasel dangle.

    Does this actually matter?

    I've often wondered why people keep trotting out these sorts of attacks. It's saying, literally, "this is not a good thing, because the person is somehow bad".

    Firstly, it's only your opinion.

    Secondly, Julian does not seem to have a lot of conceit, pompousness, or self-importance in other matters - including interviews. He's certainly confident and well-informed, but I haven't seen anything particularly negative about his demeanour.

    Attention whore is an explanation of this one action, but with no other corroborating evidence do you think the explanation is likely? Are other explanations more likely than this one?

    Thirdly, and most importantly, is this in any way relevant? Is there some reason we can't say "good job, Julian!" and think that maybe his actions are doing some good for the world?

    Must we discount this achievement because he's not your model of perfection?