> Assange has repeatedly said that they do not filter or edit in any way the contents of their leaks. That means that they don't remove credit card information,

> Assange has repeatedly said that they do not filter or edit in any way the contents of their leaks. That means that they don't remove credit card information, social security numbers, or malware. This is not true. They redacted all but the last 4 digits of the credit card numbers. > They could release an edited version and achieve transparency, but... They _do_ edit. They removed all but the last 4 digits on credit card numbers. So, they edit in the ways they deem appropriate. I think the consensus is that generally, their extremely limited (and IMO, irresponsible) redaction policy does pose a threat to innocent people. The argument against responsible redaction seems to be: "Well, who knows where that social security number may lead!" Under this line of reasoning, _everything_ is fair game, and I find that abhorrent. If an innocent photo were discovered in those emails of a naked child, say the son or daughter of someone working for the campaign, you're telling me that it should be included in the archive simply to protect the sanctity of the dump? Puh-lease. Transparency is important, but not at the risk of our own humanity.