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."
There's all kinds of PII and PHI in that stolen information.
I'm sure these folks don't care, because, like Assange, they're trolls. When they're helping your side, they're described with superlatives. When they're harming your side, they're described with expletives. They don't care. They just do what they do for their own personal reasons.
It's called "Polonium-210"
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wik...
You are welcome on my lawn.
Hope the security is strong with you.
Fancy Bear just authorized unlimited overtime.
Happiness in intelligent people is the rarest thing I know.
Ernest Hemingway
The heck? Citation needed, EditorDavid...
I second this. However I'll wait until Glenn Greenwald checks in on this. If anyone can find a way to excuse Julian Assange he can.
Personally I have become disenchanted with Assange in various ways. He could have contributed so much more than he did but he persisted in making dumb choices, making it hard for the right people to take him seriously.
There have been numerous leaks exposing Russian misbehavior, all of which are conspicuously absent from Wikileaks. Some of which are discussed in the fucking summary if you want a "citation."
Wikileaks was an awesome idea, and then Assange destroyed it when he let his ego get the best of him and turned it into an anti American disinformation machine.
You said conspiracy theory like it was bullshit, and then deep state like itâ(TM)s real. Convenient. Tool.
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.
Black Russian: Kahlua & Vodka.
White Russian: Kahlua & Vodka & Cream.
Dead Russian: Polonium & Novichok.
Garnish with an umbrella swizzle stick laced with Ricin.
Although, considering what Saudi Arabia was allowed to do to Jamal Khashoggi . . . this really isn't something we should be making fun of . . .
Schroedinger's Brexit: The UK is both in and out of the EU at the same time!
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.
No commodity of any kind, way, shape or form is unfundable on the Internet. You know that. Look at Silk Road.
The payment methods you mention are outdated. If that were not true, the Dark Web would have no market.
It little behooves the best of us to comment on the rest of us.
That's right.
Hybrid warfare is only okay when Russian three-letter agencies do it.
Right, got it ;-)
"The reason he did so is because he viewed the US as beholden to powerful international foreign anti-journalist criminal interests like Saudi Arabia and Israel and wanted to expose the worldwide surveillance was being used for evil."
Unlike the Russian government which is all teddy bears and moonbeams and under no circumstances would they shut down non governmental media outlets and order the extra judicial murders of journalists or poison former citizens on foreign soil. No no , not at all. Squeaky clean is Putin.
Its fucking incredible that in the 21st century there are still pathetic Russian apologists in the west no matter what the Russians do. Whilst the Russia people are no better or worse than anyone else in the world, their politicians are and have been for at least 100 years, psychopathic scumbags who will literally do anything to gain and keep power.
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?