Slashdot Mirror
'This Time It's Russia's Emails Getting Leaked' (thedailybeast.com)
"Russian oligarchs and Kremlin apparatchiks may find the tables turned on them," writes Kevin Poulsen at The Daily Beast, reporting on a new leak site that's unleashed "a compilation of hundreds of thousands of hacked emails and gigabytes of leaked documents."
"Think of it as WikiLeaks, but without Julian Assange's aversion to posting Russian secrets."
Slashdot reader hyades1 shared their report: The site, Distributed Denial of Secrets, was founded last month by transparency activists. Co-founder Emma Best said the Russian leaks, slated for release Friday, will bring into one place dozens of different archives of hacked material that, at best, have been difficult to locate, and in some cases appear to have disappeared entirely from the web. "Stuff from politicians, journalists, bankers, folks in oligarch and religious circles, nationalists, separatists, terrorists operating in Ukraine," said Best, a national-security journalist and transparency activist. "Hundreds of thousands of emails, Skype and Facebook messages, along with lots of docs...."
The site is a kind of academic library or a museum for leak scholars, housing such diverse artifacts as the files North Korea stole from Sony in 2014, and a leak from the Special State Protection Service of Azerbaijan.
The site's Russia section already includes a leak from Russia's Ministry of the Interior, portions of which detailed the deployment of Russian troops to Ukraine at a time when the Kremlin was denying a military presence there. Though some material from that leak was published in 2014, about half of it wasn't, and WikiLeaks reportedly rejected a request to host the files two years later, at a time when Julian Assange was focused on exposing Democratic Party documents passed to WikiLeaks by Kremlin hackers. "A lot of what WikiLeaks will do is organize and re-publish information that's appeared elsewhere," said Nicholas Weaver, a researcher at the University of California at Berkeley's International Computer Science Institute. "They've never done that with anything out of Russia."
The Russian documents were posted simultaneously on the DDoSecrets website and on the Internet Archive, notes the New York Times, adding that the new site has also posted a large archive of internal documents from WikiLeaks itself.
"Personally, I am disappointed by what I see as dishonest and egotistic behavior from Julian Assange and WikiLeaks," Best tells the Times. "But she added that she had made the Russian document collection available to WikiLeaks ahead of its public release on Friday, and had posted material favorable to Mr. Assange leaked from the Ecuadorean Embassy in London, where he has lived for more than six years to avoid arrest."
"Think of it as WikiLeaks, but without Julian Assange's aversion to posting Russian secrets."
Slashdot reader hyades1 shared their report: The site, Distributed Denial of Secrets, was founded last month by transparency activists. Co-founder Emma Best said the Russian leaks, slated for release Friday, will bring into one place dozens of different archives of hacked material that, at best, have been difficult to locate, and in some cases appear to have disappeared entirely from the web. "Stuff from politicians, journalists, bankers, folks in oligarch and religious circles, nationalists, separatists, terrorists operating in Ukraine," said Best, a national-security journalist and transparency activist. "Hundreds of thousands of emails, Skype and Facebook messages, along with lots of docs...."
The site is a kind of academic library or a museum for leak scholars, housing such diverse artifacts as the files North Korea stole from Sony in 2014, and a leak from the Special State Protection Service of Azerbaijan.
The site's Russia section already includes a leak from Russia's Ministry of the Interior, portions of which detailed the deployment of Russian troops to Ukraine at a time when the Kremlin was denying a military presence there. Though some material from that leak was published in 2014, about half of it wasn't, and WikiLeaks reportedly rejected a request to host the files two years later, at a time when Julian Assange was focused on exposing Democratic Party documents passed to WikiLeaks by Kremlin hackers. "A lot of what WikiLeaks will do is organize and re-publish information that's appeared elsewhere," said Nicholas Weaver, a researcher at the University of California at Berkeley's International Computer Science Institute. "They've never done that with anything out of Russia."
The Russian documents were posted simultaneously on the DDoSecrets website and on the Internet Archive, notes the New York Times, adding that the new site has also posted a large archive of internal documents from WikiLeaks itself.
"Personally, I am disappointed by what I see as dishonest and egotistic behavior from Julian Assange and WikiLeaks," Best tells the Times. "But she added that she had made the Russian document collection available to WikiLeaks ahead of its public release on Friday, and had posted material favorable to Mr. Assange leaked from the Ecuadorean Embassy in London, where he has lived for more than six years to avoid arrest."
Guccifer 2.0 is presumed to be the "person" who supplied the DNC emails to wikileaks and, quoting wikipedia, "The U.S. Intelligence Community concluded that some of the genuine leaks that Guccifer 2.0 has said were part of a series of cyberattacks on the DNC were committed by two Russian intelligence groups. This conclusion is based on analyses conducted by various private sector cybersecurity individuals and firms, including CrowdStrike, Fidelis Cybersecurity, Fireeye's Mandiant, SecureWorks, ThreatConnect, Trend Micro, and the security editor for Ars Technica.". Wikipedia provides numerous citations to back that up. idk if the U.S. Intelligence Community conducted analysis above and beyond what the private sector cybersecurity firms did but I think it's a safe assumption that they did.
Of course, I suppose you can always dismiss the U.S. Intelligence Community's analysis if you assume that it's all part of the deep state conspiracy against Trump. And the private sector firms... I guess Trump supporters can just dismiss them as peddlers of fake news too.
Pegging is not homosexual. It is a perfectly normal activity between a man and a woman. At least that's what my wife keeps telling me.
You are welcome on my lawn.
You are correct, and there's a little more:
1.) Assange began his high profile association with Wikileaks as a spokesperson, only. That essentially made him immune to legal action because he made it clear he did not have anything to do with the internals of WL.
Later, when pissed off governments wanted his young ass, he changed his job description to, "journalist," in an effort to be immune by way of freedom of the press.
2.) WL itself fell off the radar and had very little in the way of exciting revelations and donations fell dramatically. They stepped back into the news cycle by violating their own strict rules of conduct by creating publicity prior to data releases.
Donors didn't bite and WL went to hell.
I've studied both Wikileaks and Assange for years and I admired their first efforts but that all soured when Assage's ego and WL's financials went in opposite directions.
It little behooves the best of us to comment on the rest of us.
"Think of it as WikiLeaks, but without Julian Assange's aversion to posting Russian secrets."
That might be a good tactic.
I reserve the write to mangle english.
Someone at Slashdot seems to be pushing the "Russia supplied Wikileaks with the DNC hack info" theory as fact when it hasn't been proven.
It hasn't been proven to you. Do not presume to know what intelligence agencies know.
But the Russia theory is pushed above all because that's the one that fuels Democratic activist outrage and the "Russian collusion" fantasy
People aren't being indicted and convicted because it's a fantasy.
Cue up the cries of "Russian bot" in 5...4...3...
I don't think you're a Russian bot but I do think you are useful idiot.
Also noticed that you are just copypastaing your own site and call everything that doesn't agree with you a "hard-left outlet".
Anons need not reply. Questions end with a question mark.
The reality is that Pelosi and Schumer did nothing but block everything while the President at least tried to negotiate with them.
The situation was:
* Democrats, Republicans, and the White house negotiated a deal in December where $1.6B was put in the budget to improve border security. This was to cover a bunch of things that would actually make the border more secure, but would not cover a wall. Note also that this was when Republicans controlled the house.
* The senate passed this budget deal with a total of 94-6 or so.
* Some right wing pundits complained that Trump was backing away from his promise.
* Trump reneged on the budget deal and decided he would accept nothing but $5.7B for the wall, no other options, no negotiating.
* Paul Ryan refused to bring the budget deal it to a vote in the House.
* The shutdown started.
Honest question: do you disagree with these facts? If so, what did I get wrong? And if not, how does this involve Pelosi blocking and Trump negotiating?