Wikileaks.org -- Tens of thousands of Afghan war docs leaked

[jammies]

I have to say that my understanding (and a random sampling of documents that I read) of the leak was that it was all about past tactical military operations in Afghanistan and didn't include details of intelligence gathering with attached names of assets; I don't condone publishing the latter and don't think it's a moral practice to publish such data that SHOULD be secret. Wikileaks should have been much more selective in what was published, no doubt.

The US government seems a little lax in securing their data as well, as it should be common practice to use code names for informants and not their real names. These are compilations of reports that are presumably forwarded from field units up the chain of command and back to the States - how many clerks, data entry people, and other personnel see these names in clear every day? That is simply terrible operational security.

[peter12]

Originally Posted by jammies

I have to say that my understanding (and a random sampling of documents that I read) of the leak was that it was all about past tactical military operations in Afghanistan and didn't include details of intelligence gathering with attached names of assets; I don't condone publishing the latter and don't think it's a moral practice to publish such data that SHOULD be secret. Wikileaks should have been much more selective in what was published, no doubt.

The US government seems a little lax in securing their data as well, as it should be common practice to use code names for informants and not their real names. These are compilations of reports that are presumably forwarded from field units up the chain of command and back to the States - how many clerks, data entry people, and other personnel see these names in clear every day? That is simply terrible operational security.

I read a book awhile ago called "Government 2.0" and while it wasn't particularly good there was a terrifying chapter on the ineptitude way in which government protects access to their data.

And if I remember, it wasn't just data but alot of government firewalls and security on things like automated hydroelectric dams were basically child-play for an experience hacker. Essentially the book said that something like the scenario in Die Hard 4 wasn't all that implausible.

http://www.amazon.ca/Government-2-0-...0428577&sr=8-1

[Azure]

Originally Posted by Hemi-Cuda

WikiLeaks is just the beginning. with how fast information can be traded now and the countless ways it can be recorded, the age of government secrecy is going to be a thing of the past. it's only going to snowball from here when future tech starts coming out, like phones you can implant under the skin, or ocular implants that function like digital cameras

In the 60s they probably said the same thing about 70s tech, and the government has always been able to keep up.

We already live in the age of the cell phone, and the ability to monitor calls, and yet the government has been able to encrypt that data too.

I don't see why they couldn't keep up with the changing world.

[Flash Walken]

Originally Posted by Azure

In the 60s they probably said the same thing about 70s tech, and the government has always been able to keep up.

We already live in the age of the cell phone, and the ability to monitor calls, and yet the government has been able to encrypt that data too.

I don't see why they couldn't keep up with the changing world.

UAV date is unencrypted and can be accessed using a 5 year old laptop if you happen to be close enough (not that close) to intercept it.

[Azure]

Originally Posted by Flash Walken

UAV date is unencrypted and can be accessed using a 5 year old laptop if you happen to be close enough (not that close) to intercept it.

Yes, which is indeed a problem. It is also well documented that the US knew about it a decade ago, but choose not to encrypt it because they didn't think the 'terrorists' would become that sophisticated.

Then again, how sophisticated do you need to be to use a $28 dollar program that only requires an internet connection to tap into the drone feed.

Shouldn't be that hard to fix since they already encrypt the uplink so people can't take over the drones.

[mikey_the_redneck]

Originally Posted by Flames Draft Watcher

Here's an interesting article about the US and Pakistan in regards to wikileaks

http://www.npr.org/templates/story/s...ryId=128817940

"To put the issue somewhat melodramatically," he wrote, "the United States is giving 'moderate' Pakistanis and the Pakistani military billions of dollars yearly in military and economic aid, which allows Pakistani military intelligence to 'secretly' help the Taliban kill Americans in Afghanistan, which will drive America out of Afghanistan and undermine U.S. help for Pakistan."

No no, this is a silly conspiracy theory.

[mikey_the_redneck]

Originally Posted by Hemi-Cuda

WikiLeaks is just the beginning. with how fast information can be traded now and the countless ways it can be recorded, the age of government secrecy is going to be a thing of the past. it's only going to snowball from here when future tech starts coming out, like phones you can implant under the skin, or ocular implants that function like digital cameras

The internet in North America will soon be locked down and carefully filtered much like in China, to keep the net from airing the dirty laundry of people in power.

It is already happening with Google and the CIA working together.....

[Azure]

I'm not being filtered from looking up anything I want....

[BlackEleven]

Originally Posted by mikey_the_redneck

It is already happening with Google and the CIA working together.....

Please explain.

[MrMastodonFarm]

Originally Posted by peter12

I'm not a snob..

Dude, yeah you are. You've been coming across as an arrogant douucherr lately. And this coming from a poster who likes you.

[Azure]

Originally Posted by BlackEleven

Please explain.

http://www.wired.com/dangerroom/2010...ve-google-cia/

[mikey_the_redneck]

Originally Posted by BlackEleven

Please explain.

Here is an example.

http://www.wired.com/dangerroom/2010...ve-google-cia/

http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/articl.../BUQLUAP8L.DTL

Oh, Azure beat me on the first one.

[Flash Walken]

Originally Posted by Azure

Yes, which is indeed a problem. It is also well documented that the US knew about it a decade ago, but choose not to encrypt it because they didn't think the 'terrorists' would become that sophisticated.

Then again, how sophisticated do you need to be to use a $28 dollar program that only requires an internet connection to tap into the drone feed.

Shouldn't be that hard to fix since they already encrypt the uplink so people can't take over the drones.

And yet it hasn't been fixed, and this is the umbrella group you believe is so on the ball?

[HPLovecraft]

Originally Posted by Azure

http://www.wired.com/dangerroom/2010...ve-google-cia/

It says the investment arm of the CIA and the investment arm of Google invested in the same company, it doesn't say they're working together.

[mikey_the_redneck]

Originally Posted by HPLovecraft

It says the investment arm of the CIA and the investment arm of Google invested in the same company, it doesn't say they're working together.

http://technology.timesonline.co.uk/...cle3652494.ece

I don't like the idea of the top search engines working with intellegence agencies in any capacity.

[HPLovecraft]

Originally Posted by mikey_the_redneck

http://technology.timesonline.co.uk/...cle3652494.ece

I don't like the idea of the top search engines working with intellegence agencies in any capacity.

That's a better link to supply, then, considering the other doesn't mention anything about them working together.

[mikey_the_redneck]

Originally Posted by HPLovecraft

That's a better link to supply, then, considering the other doesn't mention anything about them working together.

If you look, you'll find alot of snipets of google working with intellegence agencies, and Facebook too. This is an extremely fine line imo....with these alliances, what if they decide to filter any political dissent on the internet?

[HPLovecraft]

Originally Posted by mikey_the_redneck

If you look, you'll find alot of snipets of google working with intellegence agencies, and Facebook too. This is an extremely fine line imo....with these alliances, what if they decide to filter any political dissent on the internet?

Use another search engine.

[Azure]

It was inevitable. The internet is WAY to much of a information resource for the government to ignore it.

Don't post your private information online if you don't have too.

[Azure]

Exclusive: The Taliban has issued a chilling warning to Afghans, alleged in secret US military files leaked on the internet to have worked as informers for the Nato-led coalition, telling Channel 4 News "US spies" will be hunted down and punished.

http://www.channel4.com/news/article...ormers/3727667

Me thinks Julian Assange should be shipped to Afghanistan and dropped into a Taliban stronghold. See how he feels then.

"We've gone through the material and reviewed it and looked for cases... like an old man saying 'next door there is a Taliban', or what he believes is Taliban. Those have been withheld," he said, adding that the source of the leaked documents had also worked to protect individuals. Mr Assange added: "I think it's unlikely that that will happen [that they could be killed]. We've worked hard to make sure there's not a significant chance of anybody coming to harm. "We can't guarantee it. But our understanding of the material is that it's vastly more likely to save lives than cost lives."

"Wikileaks, for all its apparent efforts to protect the identity of Afghan nationals working as informants, has inadvertently served up a hit list for Taliban death squads, complete with the names of 'collaborators' and details of where they live. "Taliban computer geeks will barely have to join the dots."

http://www.channel4.com/news/article...+group/3727677

Moron.