59 ms·

Wikileaks: Julian Assange's internet access 'cut'

• Shank 10y ago
  Seems to me like whichever "state party" this was didn't consider the implications behind their actions. Wikileaks has released insurance files in the past, and I wouldn't be surprised if this doesn't, automatically or not, trigger a dead man's switch for more leaks. If you're a state party trying to prevent leaks, silencing Julian is probably the worst way to go about it. It would be arcane not to think of this scenario and plan for it.
  • venomsnake 10y ago
    Don't underestimate the ability of intelligence agencies to lack it ...
  • BinaryIdiot 10y ago
    Seems overblown. Do they really have enough data to dead man switch? I'm unconvinced. Sure they may have something but if it was that good they would have released it by now. Even if whatever they have (if anything) is actually good I would imagine risking it leaking is much better than leaving Julian in position to constantly leak things for a lifetime.
  • Solinoid 10y ago
    So long as we're all speculating, perhaps the state actor who leaked the documents to Wikileaks in the first place didn't agree with Assange's schedule and wants to trigger the dead man's switch. Well, I'm off to read some classic Tom Clancy.
    • Roritharr 10y ago
      That sounds sensible, they say it's over 500GB of Documents. The release of such a flood of files would swamp all "public intelligence capacity" until after the election. If you looked at how long it took to find the gold nuggets in the Podesta mails it sounds reasonable willing to force their hand.
      • FireBeyond 10y ago
        I think that any intelligence community that couldn't digest 500GB in full text / keyword searching (keywords that are likely already configured/known) between now and the election would be a pretty sad intelligence community. Apropos of the keyword list, dissecting the corpus could be done in a few hours with a promo-code worth of AWS time.
        • hulahoof 10y ago
          I think "Public Intelligence Capacity" was referring to the ability for use regular members of society to find and verify meaningful information from the leaks.
          • Roritharr 10y ago
            Yes, i thought more of "people on 4chan" than actually any Intelligence Service of any nation state. I'm pretty sure they are mining it, but there would be political fallout from publishing their findings.
  • varjag 10y ago
    Or there's no insurance files and Assange is bluffing. He won't sit on some scoop harming the United States for long, his ego and power trip would force his hand.
    • mbreedlove 10y ago
      The insurance files are public. They just have to release the keys. 3.6GB - http://wlstorage.net/torrent/wlinsurance-20130815-A.aes256.torrent http://wlstorage.net/torrent/wlinsurance-20130815-A.aes256.t... 49GB - http://wlstorage.net/torrent/wlinsurance-20130815-B.aes256.torrent http://wlstorage.net/torrent/wlinsurance-20130815-B.aes256.t... 349GB - http://wlstorage.net/torrent/wlinsurance-20130815-C.aes256.torrent http://wlstorage.net/torrent/wlinsurance-20130815-C.aes256.t... 94GB - https://file.wikileaks.org/torrent/2016-06-03_insurance.aes256.torrent https://file.wikileaks.org/torrent/2016-06-03_insurance.aes2... I don't know why they would put out a few hundred gigabytes of fake files. The contents might not be as interesting as people hope, though.
      • countingteeth 10y ago
        "Bluffing." It takes zero effort to distribute a a few hundred gigabytes of encrypted random data, relative to the amount of investigation and speculation as to what if anything is in those files. They are called "insurance." Assange/Wikileaks wanted to deter actions being taken against him. Seems to me as likely as not that there is nothing really there.
        • appleflaxen 10y ago
          the good news is that you don't even need to encrypt your data, if they are random to start with.
          • amelius 10y ago
            That might be tricky. An encrypted file may have some properties a random file does not have in general.
  • imron 10y ago
    > It would be arcane not to think of this scenario and plan for it. And following on from this line of thought, it is therefore not unreasonable to conclude that they did think of this scenario, but feel that the risk of calling Assange's bluff (see the speculation that the insurance files are just random data meant to seed misinformation) is less than the risk of whatever they think he knows about them being leaked. Which makes you wonder, what are they afraid of to consider such action?
• Pilfer 10y ago
  Rodger Stone (who may have back-channel communications with Wikileaks staff [0]) shared two tweets suggesting that this might be US backed action. Note these tweets are still unconfirmed. At time of writing I have not yet seen this information corroborated elsewhere. 1) "John Kerry has threatened the Ecuadorian President with "grave consequences for Equador" if Assange is not silenced @StoneColdTruth" [1] 2) "Reports the Brits storm the Ecuadorian Embassy tonite while Kerry demands the UK revoke their diplomatic status so Assange can be seized" [2] It really does make me wonder what documents Wikileaks might have that could make US diplomats so riled up. [0] http://talkingpointsmemo.com/livewire/roger-stone-back-channel-julian-assange http://talkingpointsmemo.com/livewire/roger-stone-back-chann... [1] https://twitter.com/RogerJStoneJr/status/787858612844695552 https://twitter.com/RogerJStoneJr/status/787858612844695552 [2] https://twitter.com/RogerJStoneJr/status/787863160149598208 https://twitter.com/RogerJStoneJr/status/787863160149598208
  • imron 10y ago
    I doubt it's back channels (Wikileaks has repudiated that before: https://twitter.com/wikileaks/status/782963650579529730 https://twitter.com/wikileaks/status/782963650579529730). Rather I'm guessing it's just speculation based on fact the John Kerry is currently visiting the UK.
  • AvenueIngres 10y ago
    > that this might be US backed action I doubt the USG is involved in this. They have a pretty solid track record of both respecting human rights and due process. Keep in mind the US government is the most ethical government in the world. Assange, on the other hand, is a rapist and a Russian puppet trying to hijack the US election. He probably is a Trump supporter in disguise and a closeted systemd committer. If that wasn't enough, there are multiple reports claiming that Assange does not respect PEP8 in his code. This last thing was the straw that broke the camel's back for me.
    • imron 10y ago
      Don't worry about the downvotes AvenueIngres, I'm guessing those people fell victim to Poe's law.
• imron 10y ago
  Well, I guess that's one way for a state actor to confirm the leaks are real...
• labster 10y ago
  If that state party is Ecuador, I'll laugh out loud.
  • sflicht 10y ago
    Whatever action was taken (and I'd bet that it was the UK acting on behalf of the US government) was almost certainly done with the Ecuadorean government's "permission" -- although that permission might have been obtained somewhat coercively.
  • cwkoss 10y ago
    Start laughing: https://twitter.com/wikileaks/status/788099178832420865 https://twitter.com/wikileaks/status/788099178832420865
  • hulahoof 10y ago
    When I first read this I chuckled at what I thought was the absurdity. I am now laughing manically with you...
• ewr24 10y ago
  Lets not forget why he is there. No internet access seems like very little punishment for what he did.
  • mythz 10y ago
    which is?
    • imron 10y ago
      Embarrassing the US government.
    • BinaryIdiot 10y ago
      I'm assuming parent is referring to the sexual assault and rape allegations against him. Depending on which side you're on you may believe they're made up charges to get him locked up or you may think he's a criminal hiding from doing said things to multiple women (2 IIRC). FYI, at the moment the statute of limitations have ended for the sexual assaults and the rape statute ends in 2020.
      • mythz 10y ago
        It's hard to believe the Ecuadorian government is complicit with helping a rapist escape justice. Rape allegations also fall neatly into NSA/GCHQ's playbook for character assassinations. Seems more likely the reasons for taking political asylum in a non-US alliance embassy, is, political.
        • BinaryIdiot 10y ago
          Yeah honestly I find it hard to find solid information in either direction. As far as I can tell it's not proven either way (he hasn't stood trial) so even if he did it I can't imagine the Ecuadorian government feeling complicit. Regardless I don't have a dog in this fight; I find both sides pretty polarizing and difficult to get to the facts.
        • cmdkeen 10y ago
• stale2002 10y ago
  Oh man! Whats the upcoming Monday Surprise going to be! They have been hyping it up. Leaks for everyone! Freaking leak Christmas over here.
  • evgen 10y ago
    Given current trends with Wikileaks-distributed Russian intel dumps, the upcoming 'surprise' will be another big fat nothing-burger. Most likely case is that Assange went a step too far in using the Ecuadorian's hospitality just to become a Russian cut-out and at some point his ongoing attempts to influence the election (and failing miserably at that) reminded the Ecuadorians that they were gaining nothing by hosting him and now were looking at another four years of fallout. TBH I don't think anyone really cared too much about Assange, but his desperate need for attention ended up leading him to play with fire.
    • gragas 10y ago
      [citation needed] Please provide evidence that the leaks are from Russia. Also, many people care a lot about Assange. Millions of people care about Assange and WikiLeaks. It is absolutely absurd (and almost un-humanitarian) to try to downplay the work that he has done.
      • lyschoening 10y ago
        U.S. intelligence services and the Obama administration have explicitly accused Russia of the leaks and assessed that this must have been orchestrated from high in the Russian government. That's a pretty bold statement in politics. Of course we can point to cases where U.S. administrations have lied, but it still should count as evidence, at least on a probabilistic level. Also, regarding Assange, I believe evgen meant to say that the administration was happy with where he was holed up until he started stirring up the pot.
        • varjag 10y ago
          Also note that the U.S. government did not implicate any foreign governments in cases of cablegate or NSA leaks, and these were as big as they get. Obama administration does not seem to throw such accusations lightly.
• Kenji 10y ago
  I wish I could help Assange. This guy deserves a medal, and barely any country has enough morals to host him. Here we have a presidential candidate seriously saying "Can't we just drone this guy?" (Hillary Clinton, obviously) and barely anyone stands up for him. People get extradited because otherwise there will be economic embargos. Trade your morals for a 4K TV. Disgusting.
  • cylinder 10y ago
    For the average population of the US, just say someone's actions increase the possibility of a terrorist attack, and you will have majority backing to throw them to the wolves (and I mean literally). There's nothing I can do as an American. Swedes, you have more power per capita, you should fight to get these ridiculous rape charges dropped so he can make safe passage to Ecuador. Amazing how Bob Woodward was a journalist hero who went onto have unprecedented access to future Presidents for his books and yet this is Assange's fate. It's disgusting.
• sflicht 10y ago
  A little more unsubstantiated info from Reddit [0]. [0] https://np.reddit.com/r/The_Donald/comments/57vu5l/red_alert_wikileaks_on_twitter_julian_assanges/d8vfhtg https://np.reddit.com/r/The_Donald/comments/57vu5l/red_alert...
  • DominikR 10y ago
    Not even the Soviet Union ignored the sovereignty of embassies. Surprising that the UK would sink so low.
  • threeseed 10y ago
    Don't forget this is the subreddit that has believed every bizarre, alt-right conspiracy theory under the sun. You do nothing but make yourself look ridiculous posting that nonsense.
    • davesque 10y ago
      Wow...I can understand that not everyone would agree with this comment, but how can this end up in the grey?? Have people actually visited /r/the_donald lately?
      • barleyworth 10y ago
        Yeah, that subreddit is terrifying. I'm more afraid of the people in there than any other terrorist group. E.g. another comment on the same thread says very matter-of-factly: "Let's just say by now you should have already bought multiple guns."
  • FireBeyond 10y ago
    Unsubstantiated indeed. That sounds like the ramblings of someone unhinged. "Thermal imagery" - in the middle of the day. "I wanted to take pictures but a policeman told me I'd be prosecuted, and in any case, they are digitally obfuscating all pictures" "All I know is I can't upload photos and all my camera images don't work" - huh, what? Which is it, you wanted to take pictures, but were told not to, or you did, but they didn't work, or ... "Military surrounding the entire blocks aiming guns at people." - and no word of this on ... anywhere "... so I went and had a coffee." - "Oh man, I just saw a military operation to grab Assange. We had guns pointed at us and they're messing with our phones and cameras so we can't even take a picture without it being corrupted, so I'm gonna go get me some Starbucks, and post on The_Donald about it..." "D-notice so media won't report" but apparently the block / street shutdown was so close to the embassy that anyone in the area could watch the whole operation... I'm going to call BS, like the sibling says, you could make millions selling tinfoil to /r/The_Donald subscribers
• DominikR 10y ago
  Pure coincidence I'm sure. It's got nothing to do with protecting Hillary Clinton and claims by many (including Matt Drudge, Milo Yiannopoulos) that today some kind of sex tape (lesbian) of her is going to leak.
  • gragas 10y ago
    What do you mean "pure coincidence"? How could a state actor cutting off Assange's internet be a coincidence with anything? It was done on purpose by someone for some reason. That is by definition not a coincidence.
    • DominikR 10y ago
      I'm trying to be sarcastic, of course it isn't a coincidence.
      • gragas 10y ago
        Ah. I didn't get that. Maybe include /s next time.
• johansch 10y ago
  More speculation: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-3842846/Rumors-swirl-Pamela-Anderson-poisoned-Julian-Assange-vegan-meal-Pret.html http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-3842846/Rumors-swirl... "Rumors that Pamela Anderson 'fatally poisoned Julian Assange with vegan meal' spread after 'coded' Wikileaks tweets lead to speculation that he triggered 'dead man's switch'"
  • BinaryIdiot 10y ago
    That was quite an amazing read. So many good conspiracy theories and none of them are as good as this one.
• anondon 10y ago
  When Assange accesses the internet, I am guessing that state actors would be trying to see what his traffic contains. How would a person in such a situation access the internet and be sure that his traffic cannot be decrypted and/or there is no man in the middle modification of his traffic. For the sake of discussion, assume he has a brand new laptop with Debain/tails or another FOSS OS. The general consensus seems to be to avoid MacOS and Windows in cases where your life is on the line.
  • Kenji 10y ago
    He needs good friends who host VPNs for him. TOR would also be a good thing. Maybe a combination of both. Of course, those friends would have to visit him in person and give him some public keys or something to verify their identity.
    • pilif 10y ago
      > He needs good friends who host VPNs for him then the state actors would just bug that good friend.
      • rtpg 10y ago
        which would require infecting the VPN machines themselves? Just wiretapping isn't sufficient because of public key encryption Assuming the nodes themselves are not compromised (big ask) and identity can be confirmed(like via key exchange), state actors can listen as much as they want to the wires, they won't be getting much. Except if some private key were out there...
        • nkadri 10y ago
          What if they are able to wiretap the traffic exiting the VPN server. With the help of the server ISP for example ?
        • tP5n 10y ago
          > Just wiretapping isn't sufficient Please explain, I was under the impression that the above could not reasonably be claimed anymore with any kind of certainty [1][2][3]. Perhaps I'm misunderstanding something important here or the 'Happy Dance!!' slide [4] made me paranoid. [1] http://arstechnica.com/security/2016/10/how-the-nsa-could-put-undetectable-trapdoors-in-millions-of-crypto-keys/ http://arstechnica.com/security/2016/10/how-the-nsa-could-pu... [2] http://arstechnica.com/security/2016/08/cisco-firewall-exploit-shows-how-nsa-decrypted-vpn-traffic/ http://arstechnica.com/security/2016/08/cisco-firewall-explo... [3] http://arstechnica.com/security/2015/10/how-the-nsa-can-break-trillions-of-encrypted-web-and-vpn-connections/ http://arstechnica.com/security/2015/10/how-the-nsa-can-brea... [4] http://www.spiegel.de/media/media-35515.pdf http://www.spiegel.de/media/media-35515.pdf
• evgen 10y ago
  Aaaaaand like all of Wikileaks' dumps, this one turns out to be completely overblown BS. Boots on the ground confirm that absolutely NOTHING is happening at the embassy, no one is breaking in and the report out of London is the standard Monday morning complaint about the morning rain and the annoying signal failure on the Central line that is messing with commutes. If Assange did lose internet access it is because the Ecuadorians changed the wifi password and didn't tell him. I am absolutely sure that we will be getting a mea culpa from Roger Stone any minute now...
  • tripzilch 10y ago
    Would you please provide a link to these "boots on the ground" sources? Otherwise your comment doesn't really contribute much.
    • evgen 10y ago
      Sorry, this is all old news to us in London who have been listening to the echo chamber freak itself out for 12 hours over a bit fat nothing. Here is a quick pointer to a similar query that went out to /r/London when the first tweets were sent: https://www.reddit.com/r/london/comments/57w670/amy_truth_that_the_ecuadorian_embassy_has_been/?st=iuecy9dp&sh=fe68caa7 https://www.reddit.com/r/london/comments/57w670/amy_truth_th... and people on the scene confirmed that contra the Roger Stone claims there was no 'assault' on the embassy. For chuckles I actually went by this afternoon and there was absolutely nothing to see. Verizon (who provides a lot of business connectivity in London) has been having problems in some places for most of the day, and it is a somewhat wet Monday so it is possible some lines shorted, but so far there is no confirmation that Assange has lost internet access and no indication from the outside that this is anything other than another day here in rainy London.
  • evgen 10y ago
    With confirmation from the Ecuadorians that they cut off his internet access I am going to take this moment to simply say "I told you so."
• werid 10y ago
  Verizon support is on the case... https://twitter.com/VerizonSupport/status/787890336270090240 https://twitter.com/VerizonSupport/status/787890336270090240
  • akerro 10y ago
    Why does Verizon end their messages with something like ^FEM or DB or DMW? What does it mean?
    • Jonnax 10y ago
      Multiple support agents use the same account so by having a small tag at the end the customer knows who they are speaking to.
• brooklyndude 10y ago
  I'm just so over Assange. Good. Cut his damn internet access. He's really starting to remind of that kid who just bugs you so much. Just go away please. That gigabyte file he's holding onto? Supposed to be a bunch of cat gifs, or so an "insider" told me.
• freeusa 10y ago
  Assange rape is an allegation only. Current U.S. administration ignores U.S. constitution. This smells of support for Hillary Clinton, not justice for Assange.
• sverige 10y ago
  Can't have him mucking up the election, after all...
• rottyguy 10y ago
  A bit of an interesting dilemma in the spirit of transparency. Given an N-way race, do you just reveal secrets pertaining to one participant (since this may be all you have) or do you with-hold until you can reveal secrets from all participants?
  • dexterdog 10y ago
    What choice do you have? You can only release what you have and you have no way of knowing what you don't have. He's not trying to reveal all of the facts in the world. He's trying to reveal the facts that he has.
  • tomp 10y ago
    Maybe they have no secrets? I mean, the point of the DNC leaks is that they (the party) helped a specific candidate (Hillary) - even before she was elected a nominee - so they in essence acted undemocratically. Unless you're speculating that the GOP was secretly sheming for Trump - something which I find extremely unlikely - then it's more than possible that any GOP leaks would in fact help Trump, as well!
    • rottyguy 10y ago
      The GOP may be divided on Trump but am sure there is private information that could help the HRC team. It doesn't have to be incriminating as planned strategy could be of value. Unsure how this is different from, say, an (american) football team playbook being revealed to the opponent.
      • khattam 10y ago
        Wikileaks is NOT helping Trump. They're merely releasing information that would make impact in the election. Assange doesn't even support Trump. He supports Jill Stein. They'd be more than happy to release any information on Trump. Unfortunately, they don't hack the information themselves. Someone else has to send it to them. Here is what Assange had to say about Trump: "I mean, it’s from a point of view of an investigative journalist organization like WikiLeaks, the problem with the Trump campaign is it’s actually hard for us to publish much more controversial material than what comes out of Donald Trump’s mouth every second day". Source: http://blogs.wsj.com/washwire/2016/08/26/assange-trumps-everyday-comments-likely-more-controversial-than-any-trump-leaks/ http://blogs.wsj.com/washwire/2016/08/26/assange-trumps-ever...
• jacquesm 10y ago
  - Is the whole embassy shut down? - Is there any direct reason for the timing (US elections, attack on Mosul or other current headlines)? - Was there any imminent release? (last week there was an announcement of a leak but it didn't materialize as far as I know) http://www.theverge.com/2016/10/4/13159914/wikileaks-hillary-clinton-julian-assange-google http://www.theverge.com/2016/10/4/13159914/wikileaks-hillary... - You'd assume that Wikileaks the organization will continue to work even without Assange having internet access so what exactly will this accomplish other than lending support to Assange's stated reasons for hiding in an embassy to begin with? edit: another comment here suggests the reason may be because his extradition is imminent. http://time.com/4532984/wikileaks-julian-assange-theories/ http://time.com/4532984/wikileaks-julian-assange-theories/
  • leereeves 10y ago
    Weren't the Podesta e-mails the wikileak from last week?
    • Mikeb85 10y ago
      They've been releasing more everyday.
      • sverige 10y ago
        It's unlawful for you to visit the Wikileaks site. https://mobile.twitter.com/wikileaks/status/787749893649600512 https://mobile.twitter.com/wikileaks/status/7877498936496005...
        • Mikeb85 10y ago
          Well, it's nice to see they no longer operate under the illusion of not being state-controlled.
        • leereeves 10y ago
          Is it really unlawful or did CNN lie about that?
• Nadya 10y ago
  I had began archiving the /news and /newest because a lot of the Wikileak threads I was upvoting were disappearing into the ether. Seems they were getting mass-flagged/killed, this one survived. Also seems there has been discussion earlier today but the threads were mass-flagged off the front page. Previously: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=12722929 [208 points, 144 comments, buried] https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=12724507 [50 points, marked as dupe] https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=12724939 [23 points, buried] https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=12724525 [7 points, marked as dupe, dead] https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=12725175 [3 points, buried instantly]
  • zitterbewegung 10y ago
    :( I created the third post in the list ...
  • leereeves 10y ago
    Doesn't Hacker News automatically bury posts that get a lot of comments?
    • ZoeZoeBee 10y ago
      No, not that I've ever seen. Though they do have a habit of burying/flagging topics pertaining to the release of documents when they concern a particular party. First few times could be brushed off as coincidence but over the last few months topics from DCLeaks, Guccifer and Wikileaks have been targeted
    • khattam 10y ago
      Only when it doesn't fit the narrative.
  • eeZah7Ux 10y ago
    The bots are working hard.
  • soundwave106 10y ago
    The problem with this story as I see it is it instantly connects with the shitshow of the American presidential cycle, and thus has attracted a wide variety of low quality (speculative / rumor mill) type of commentary unfortunately. The only sure conclusion I've personally reached in this election cycle is that no one sane would want to run for American president, or even be a part of any American political system (beyond the local level where things seem a bit more level headed)....
• staticelf 10y ago
  From a Swedish perspective the Julian Assange case is particular close to the heart since it really shows how corrupt even our courts and politicians are. Sweden is rated as one of the countries with the lowest corruption but still 6 years have passed without even interviewing him for the pathetic accusations. The entire case is a joke and whatever the US-election result is, it's bad for the entire world since our corrupt politicians will do whatever American corrupt politicians say.
  • rimantas 10y ago
    How do you suggest Sweden should interview him? Attack an embassy?
    • jacquesm 10y ago
      Just go visit. He already agreed that it would be ok long ago.
      • dagw 10y ago
        It's not that simple. They had to find a procedure that is acceptable to Swedish, Ecuadorian and British courts. These negotiations have only recently been completed and a meeting has tentatively been booked for the end of October.
        • jacquesm 10y ago
          Yes, I'm sure that there was no way this could have been done faster and that the statue of limitations in Sweden running out had nothing to do with it. /s
          • dagw 10y ago
            Sure it could have been done faster, but that doesn't mean the necessary legal negotiations where trivial.
• unixhero 10y ago
  From the bowels of 4Chan https://i.imgur.com/abcVS6q.jpg https://i.imgur.com/abcVS6q.jpg
  • jacquesm 10y ago
    Scary timing. So one possible reason this could be is to stop him from rallying the troops.
    • arkitaip 10y ago
      You actually believe some 4channers when he says he is a intelligence officer? I have a bridge to sell you...
      • jacquesm 10y ago
        No, I don't believe it, but it is a possibility I had not thought of and the fact that Assange's internet access has been shut off lends at least a little bit of credibility to the comments (note how that post was made already 8 hours ago). also, why would I believe some anonymous HN'er about anything. Information is either true or false, the source isn't really relevant, all that matters are the facts.
        • fnovd 10y ago
          >Information is either true or false, the source isn't really relevant, all that matters are the facts. Absurd. Of course your sources matter. A credible source is more believable than an incredible source. Ever heard of "The Boy Who Cried Wolf"? Looking only at the material presented and not at the presenter of the material is only giving you part of the picture.
          • jacquesm 10y ago
            Yes, sources matter if all you do is to look at the information and it's source. But if you look at the information and you can find independent verification of rejection of the information then you can form a conclusion that is a lot stronger than just speculation based on info+source. Possible facts: Assange has had his internet access shut down (probably true) Assange has been extradited (status unknown at this point, you seem to want to discredit it based on the source I simply withhold my judgment until there is more information about this)
• mtgx 10y ago
  The US gov/Obama must be really pissed off he's trying to bring Clinton down (I hope it's obvious this wasn't just a UK-only decision - it's never been a UK-only decision to keep Assange sequestrated there anyway).
• dominotw 10y ago
  This story keeps getting flagged as a dupe. https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=12724507 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=12724507 for another thread that was on front page when most of US was asleep https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=12722929 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=12722929 Mods, would it possible to keep this story up?
  • Tomte 10y ago
    I don't think any thread should get a guaranteed 24h exposure. Either the comments and upvotes justify it or they don't. Otherwise I'd like a guarantee that we Europeans get to see all those interesting stories that broke 12h earlier.
  • sctb 10y ago
    The Twitter thread got buried mostly by flags and the flamewar detector, and though we usually override those penalties when it's clear that another discussion will just take its place, sometimes we're sleeping off another political controversy. We'll avoid marking this one as a duplicate and try to merge the discussions as best we can.
• harryf 10y ago
  The more I look at this, the more it seems like a brilliant move by Assange to force the media to report more on Wikileaks and the Podesta emails, not just Trumps locker-room antics.
  • mejari 10y ago
    Locker-room antics of sexual assault?
    • harryf 10y ago
      Oh you mean that thing that is currently everywhere right now? Thanks for reminding me! Almost had my mind off it for 2 minutes while reading this Intercept article about Hillary's relationship with the press https://theintercept.com/2016/10/09/exclusive-new-email-leak-reveals-clinton-campaigns-cozy-press-relationship/ https://theintercept.com/2016/10/09/exclusive-new-email-leak...
      • mejari 10y ago
        You... you literally brought it up yourself. Why are you angry at me for responding to your own point?
        • harryf 10y ago
          Why do you assume I'm angry? I'm quite happy while questioning your agenda
          • mejari 10y ago
            My "agenda" was a direct response to your comment. You act like I'm trying to change the subject or something.
• known 10y ago
  How can we protest?
  • back_beyond 10y ago
    A vote for Trump is protest.
• throwawayIndian 10y ago
  > so what exactly will this accomplish… Many things! Instill a fear may be. Demonstrate their power to kill at will and their willingness to do so. Prevent outing of more truths about the Silicon Valley-Washington DC alliance. Meh. Let the downvotes begin… :)
  • Cthulhu_ 10y ago
    Shutting down internet is far from 'killing at will' tbf. They could already do that, it's just an embassy in a country with a decent military. Of course, the political backlash would be rather severe, not nearly as much as 'just' some hacking which doesn't cause direct loss of life and which is often conveniently untraceable.
    • lostgame 10y ago
      >> 'Shutting down internet is far from 'killing at will' tbf' Next they'll be threatening to quit Twitter! ... South Park? ... nobody? ... I'll be in my trailer.
  • toomuchtodo 10y ago
    As Archer would say: "Do you want terrorist groups? Because this is how you get terrorist groups." Or, another way, one man's terrorist is another's freedom fighter. What option are citizens left with when state collusion to deny people their basic rights occurs in broad daylight?
    • throwaway98237 10y ago
      Which is exactly why I deplore the term "terrorist". The U.S. throws the term terrorist around with reckless abandon while proudly parading its strategy of "Shock and Awe"[1] and weapons like the "Daisy Cutter"[2] around on CNN. How are those two examples anything other than naked attempts to instill terror in it's enemies??? [1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Shock_and_awe https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Shock_and_awe [2] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/BLU-82 https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/BLU-82
• marketanarchist 10y ago
  Does anyone honestly believe Hillary is not involved in this? She has shown time and time again that there is nothing she won't do to get what she wants and cling on to power.
  • bbctol 10y ago
    What do you think Hillary's involvement is? What power does she have here?
    • scarmig 10y ago
      Well, she did want to drone Assange for his terrorist activities...
      • adrianmoses 10y ago
        Is there any evidence that she said this?
        • fnovd 10y ago
          There is, but like all of the other wikileaks 'scandals' there's nothing there when you actually look at the context. She said it as a joke, got the room to laugh, and moved on. Read the sources, there is really nothing to these leaks. edit with tweet in question: https://twitter.com/wikileaks/status/782906224937410562 https://twitter.com/wikileaks/status/782906224937410562 edit2: Notice the colorful language: she "openly inquired" instead of "joked". The laughter "died" when she "kept talking in a terse manner". It's all doublespeak.
    • MichaelBurge 10y ago
      Obama was recently revealed to be communicating with her personal email server, in a Wikileaks leak. Podesta asked if they should withhold those presidential emails from the FBI. And then this happened. It could be that Obama is now pressuring them to get Assange, since Wikileaks is covering him. And certainly Obama does have the ability to project power worldwide.
• nateberkopec 10y ago
  I wonder if he's bluffing with the MD5 hashes that were tweeted out. No way to know.
  • 45h34jh53k4j 10y ago
    SHA-256; MD5 too easy to find collisions now. This hash is broken never us it. It doubt its a bluff, as JA hasn't bluffed with these things before.
• marcoperaza 10y ago
  My guess is that the US is applying pressure on Ecuador. They want the leaks to stop. Ecuador already has incentives to stop helping Trump, as Trump has recently taken a hard line against Latin American strongmen, of which Correa, President of Ecuador, is one. Some assurances from Hillary, and threats from Obama, could have been enough to push him over. I imagine that one of the currently unspoken fears that the Democrats have with wikileaks is that they've built up immense credibility and could choose to cash it in by dropping a fake leak a day or two before the election. Or they could drop an incredibly damaging REAL leak, which is even scarier for the Democrats. There's no doubt that the Clintons have skeletons in their closet. What I find extremely disturbing is that Obama was fine with RT and Wikileaks when they were mostly advancing the then-leftist agenda of better relations with Russia and US non-interventionism. Now that things have shifted and they are now undermining Obama's agenda and chosen successor, he's suddenly discovered his inner cold warrior. The real winner here is Mitt Romney. The Democrats mocked him, nothing short of laughing in his face, when during the 2012 election he said Russia was our biggest geopolitical threat. Obama, around the same time, was caught telling the Russians he could be "more flexible after the election". They took that flexibility and marched all the way into Ukraine, Syria, and (allegedly) DNC and Clinton email servers with it. Obama owes him an apology.
  • gok 10y ago
    I don't necessarily agree that Obama himself was fine with Wikileaks, but it's certainly true that many on the American left loved the leaks when they revealed ostensibly embarrassing details about things they do not support (the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan) and then suddenly got rather upset when the leaks revealed ostensibly embarrassing details about things they do support (Clinton). Of course the same could be said about many on the right.
    • deleted 10y ago
      [deleted]
    • arkitaip 10y ago
      It could be said about every one of us. Heck, I found myself being annoyed at Wikileaks during the past days because of the DNC leaks and I don't even support them or Hillary Clinton. Bias is one helluva drug.
• olivermarks 10y ago
  An enjoyable Twitter thread https://twitter.com/wikileaks/status/782906224937410562 https://twitter.com/wikileaks/status/782906224937410562
  • deleted 10y ago
    [deleted]
• olivermarks 10y ago
  An enjoyable Twiter thread https://twitter.com/wikileaks/status/782906224937410562 https://twitter.com/wikileaks/status/782906224937410562
• Alex3917 10y ago
  > Is the whole embassy shut down? Not likely. They're not just going to cut his Internet and then drone him the same day. They're hoping he comes out on his own. My guess is that if they decide to kill him they'd likely do it next Friday evening, on the bet that the deadman's switch has a 14-day timeout.
  • jstanley 10y ago
    He said shut down, not shot down. Is the internet access for the whole embassy disconnected, or have they isolated it to Julian Assange?
  • echelon 10y ago
    What in the world makes you think they'd kill Assange? That seems extreme.
    • Kenji 10y ago
      How about Hillary Clinton literally saying "Can't we just drone this guy?" [1] [1] https://twitter.com/wikileaks/status/782906224937410562 https://twitter.com/wikileaks/status/782906224937410562
      • 1986 10y ago
        True Pundit is not in any way shape or form a reliable source and this quote is completely unsourced.
        • jsprogrammer 10y ago
          Hillary said[0] that she didn't recall joking about it, but that if she did say it, it would have been a joke. [0] https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iSTht4G4yJs https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iSTht4G4yJs
          • nickff 10y ago
            To be clear, this is coming from a woman who has repeatedly told bald-faced lies; anything short of a complete denial is a confirmation.
• herghost 10y ago
  I do find myself confused by Assange's motivation when taken in context of his circumstances. If he has and holds evidence of something so damaging that a tweet of the supposed hash of the file is enough to be a threat to a person in power, then why has he allowed himself to live under effectively self-imposed house-arrest for the past 4 years? I can't imagine that the Wikileaks apparatus doesn't have sufficient op-sec and op-capability to ensure that whatever they're holding gets released effectively should they choose for it to be, so I find myself erring towards this being an over-played hand for the most part.
  • drzaiusapelord 10y ago
    Or they don't have anything of value that they haven't released. The idea that's he's sitting on something valuable to protect himself seems questionable to me considering he's pretty much a prisoner in an embassy for the forseeable future. I suspect Assange's ego is way to big for him to sit on anything 'juicy' for very long. He needs to keep himself and wikileaks relevant. Also they have the ability to spread information as they see fit. See his various leaks for example. Assange isn't hosting an ftp for everyone at the embassy. This stuff goes out via torrents, mailed drives to journalists, and via Assange's army of helpers.
  • chejazi 10y ago
    The only explanation is that the revelations are recent. We won't know until (if) it's released.
  • dmichulke 10y ago
    He could be tortured or pressure could be put on his contacts. In the former case he might fear he releases the secret to stop the Dead Man's Switch, in the latter case his contacts might avoid him or be tortured themselves just to pressure JA, so it doesn't sound like a free life either.
  • ddalex 10y ago
    It's akin to a nuclear exchange. You can only use it once. It's MAD. So you hold onto it to protect a high value asset - your life. Assume that you want charges dropped unto you - and you get that granted. Then you want something more annoying to the powers you control - maybe that would be granted. But at a certain point the cost to grant you wishes is going to be on the same level as the threat you hold over me, and then I may decide to take the fallout, and be done with it. I suspect we're on the verge of this - Assange has something so damning that the fallout of having him taken out in broad daylight becomes something you contemplate. If this is so, at this point if Assange goes public with what he knows, he's a dead man anyway.
• Iv 10y ago
  My understanding is that we do not have any proofs of life from Assange. It could be many things: assassination, deal with Ecuador, extradition by Ecuador or someone else, simply an internet censorship, a PR stunt by Assange. All is possible. This guy lives a fucking dystopian nightmare.
  • ctz 10y ago
    It could be any of these things. It could also be BT OpenReach.
    • Monotoko 10y ago
      Definitely most likely.
  • jonknee 10y ago
    Yea or it could just be the internet is down. It happens to regular people all the time.
    • marcoperaza 10y ago
      Unlikely, there are clearly moves being made today against Russian-backed and allegedly Russian-backed propaganda outfits. RT just had its bank accounts frozen in the UK as well. Also, have you ever heard of LTE?
      • jonknee 10y ago
        Perhaps, though there is just one unsubstantiated claim and he obviously still has some access since the claim was made online.
      • FireBeyond 10y ago
        It's "unlikely"? No, you're right, clearly the most obvious motive is conspiracy. Also, other people have reported, and it's pretty common in a lot of embassies, not just the Ecuadorian, that cell phones are either actively jammed or the embassy is built as a Faraday cage. I had no cell service in the US embassy in Sydney, despite being in the middle of a capital city within 10 ft of a window.
• willvarfar 10y ago
  It suits Assange's narrative to say its a "state actor", just as it suited Yahoo's board to claim "state actors" as they disclosed their latest breach. Assange's ego really dilutes the wikileaks original goals and its no surprise that the actual doers in the organisation upped and left in 2010.
  • bandrami 10y ago
    Ecuador is also a "state actor", and they're sick of this situation.
    • grzm 10y ago
      It probably didn't help that one of the pre-commitment hashes was labeled "Ecuador" > pre-commitment 2: Ecuador eae5c9b064ed649ba468f0800abf8b56ae5cfe355b93b1ce90a1b92a48a9ab72 https://twitter.com/wikileaks/status/787781046519693316 https://twitter.com/wikileaks/status/787781046519693316
  • gaur 10y ago
    I had a neutral opinion of Assange until he posted (and then deleted) a tweet with echo parentheses. That made it pretty obvious he's not really in it for any noble purpose.
    • SamBam 10y ago
      Wow. Screenshot? (For those not aware, (((echo parenthesis))) are an anti-semitic symbol used by white supremacists to highlight people who are Jewish.) https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Triple_parentheses https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Triple_parentheses Edit: Wow, here it is: http://www.dailydot.com/layer8/wikileaks-echoes-tweet-anti-semitism/ http://www.dailydot.com/layer8/wikileaks-echoes-tweet-anti-s... Most of our critics have 3 (((brackets around their names))) & have black-rim glasses. i.e. most of our critics are Jewish. Presumably part of some kind of cabal.... Here's a white-supremacist organization praising Assange for the tweet: http://www.dailystormer.com/julian-assange-and-general-flynn-attack-dirty-jews-on-twitter/ http://www.dailystormer.com/julian-assange-and-general-flynn... Anti-Semitism is rising. Everywhere. We are going high-profile. Wikileaks’ Julian Assange and General Flynn this week have tweeted openly anti-Semitic tweets.
• DougN7 10y ago
  I am getting so damn sick of all of the corruption we're seeing in governments all around the world, including the US/UK. Makes me want to vote for Trump and take the whole crooked system down (unfortunately, that would cause a LOT of pain for good everyday people).
  • pavlov 10y ago
    Yeah, the best way to cure a flu is to shoot yourself in the head.
    • DougN7 10y ago
      Hey, it would work! But you're right - it's an irrational response to a very frustrating situation of feeling powerless to fix things that are so obviously wrong.
    • tomp 10y ago
      Hillary => no change. Trump => change. Positive or negative? Who knows...
      • DougN7 10y ago
        I personally think Clinton will be worse than Obama or Bush when it comes to any issue involving ethics.
      • pavlov 10y ago
        What do you mean, "who knows"? Seriously, I have no idea how you can listen to anything Trump says and come away with the idea that he represents positive change. Granted, most of Trump's output is not even properly formed sentences, so maybe he's doing a malformed data denial-of-service attack on voters' senses?
        • daveloyall 10y ago
          That's an excellent way to describe it. Most of his verbal quirks appear to be designed to get around various filters.
• VertexRed 10y ago
  Shouldn't be too difficult to surpass by temporarily using mobile data or setting up an antenna for long-range wifi.
  • KevinEldon 10y ago
    Assuming Assange is free and living.
    • VertexRed 10y ago
      Well if he wasn't the Wikileaks team would've said something. He also has other people working for him which would be able to help him out with this. And thanks for the downvote.
• deleted 10y ago
  [deleted]
• throwaway98237 10y ago
  Perhaps this is this election cycle's "October Surprise"? If this is Clinton attempting to seal-the-deal on the election, I'm officially not voting. Anyone that uses the power of the state (read: the power of the gun) to silence speech is a non-starter in my book.
  • mark_l_watson 10y ago
    I don't feel comfortable telling anyone who to vote for - a personal decision that is no one else's business. I will say that for myself, when I was filling out my early mail-in ballot yesterday, it was an easy decision voting for Jill Stein. Our political system is corrupt and when lots of people (in the many millions) vote for 3rd party candidates, that at least makes it harder for the establishment to maintain the misdirection that our two party system gives voters any real choice. EDIT: you may have noticed the establishment propaganda instruments like MSNBC and Fox News have a real campaign to discredit all 3rd party candidates in all elections. Chuck Todd did a particularly shameless review of many 3rd party candidates, mocking them, and mocking people who would vote for any 3rd party candidates. What an asshole, and what un-American behavior. Everyone's opinion should be respected.
    • fnovd 10y ago
      >Our political system is corrupt and when lots of people (in the many millions) vote for 3rd party candidates, that at least makes it harder for the establishment to maintain the misdirection that our two party system gives voters any real choice. So you're saying that voting 3rd party makes it harder for "the establishment" to fool people into thinking they had a choice to begin with? That voting makes it harder for the media to fool you into thinking your vote matters? That drinking the Kool-aid makes it harder for Big Brother to trick you into drinking the Kool-aid?
      • mark_l_watson 10y ago
        I don't think I am being fooled, but most people would say that. I totally support friends and family who are voting for Trump and Clinton, even if I like neither of them.
• arviewer 10y ago
  How much is a 4G dataplan in London? Even when he uses 100GB that should be payable by them. Is that blocked as well? Then they have to block out that area, and that won't go unnoticed.
  • iraklism 10y ago
    You can block mobile with directional means. It can be very targeted.
• dantillberg 10y ago
  This story only states that Assange told them this along with his suspicion that he's been targeted by some state, not e.g. a tree falling or a jackhammer mis-jackhammering. BBC has not verified any of those claims, and they went and reported it despite the fact that part of it either isn't clear or doesn't make sense -- what does it even mean to have his internet "cut"? This story could just as well turn out to be of a tree or a jackhammer.
  • ng12 10y ago
    If it were BT's fault surely they would provide an outage notice?
• PJDK 10y ago
  I'm a bit confused by all the comments here spinning off down conspiracy theories, but not much on facts. "State actor" can only really mean UK or Ecuadorian government - or at the very least one of those two must be pulling the trigger. If it's Ecuador that makes some sense, they control the connections to the outside world - they could just change some passwords and internet is cut. But that would be very obviously what had happened so why not just name them. Alternatively the UK could cut the connection from outside the embassy. I don't see how that could be done without cutting off the internet for the whole embassy. That would possibly be in breach of the Vienna Convention [0] but at the very least I can't imagine it happening without creating a gigantic diplomatic stink. Neither of those options sound that plausible. Is there a third I've missed? Somehow know it's Assange browsing and kill all his packets in flight? Also, this is central London - the internet floats freely through the air. Contingency measure is tethering? [0]https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Vienna_Convention_on_Diplomatic_Relations#Summary_of_provisions https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Vienna_Convention_on_Diplomati...
  • mikeash 10y ago
    That's because there are no facts. We don't even know if the internet was cut in the first place. (One wonders how they managed to post to Twitter without internet access.) The "state actor" part is completely unsubstantiated. The third option you've missed is "this is all bullshit." Either because it's not happening at all, or because the embassy's internet is down due to some routine outage.
    • paralelogram 10y ago
      It's possible to use Twitter via SMS: https://support.twitter.com/articles/14014 https://support.twitter.com/articles/14014
      • mikeash 10y ago
        It would be pretty weird if SMS were available but not data.
• anthony_romeo 10y ago
  We're in the middle of some crazy propaganda war right now, and it's been this way for quite a while. It became completely transparent when the Podesta e-mails were released mere minutes after Trump's videos regarding possible sexual assault were released. Ever since the DNC leaks and the subsequent accusations against Russia, it became clear to me that, at some point, the attempts to tarnish Wikileaks's name was to prime the listening audience in a way such that when information so irreparably damaging would get released, the voters would have to choose between continuing a corrupt government and choosing an apparently mad authoritarian, and to soften the landing on the former. Since the RNC, Trump's campaign has been entirely pushing "Don't believe their lies", and the gaslighting from both sides seems to be hitting a nadir at this moment. It's becoming far more difficult to find reality in the fog. These are indeed interesting times.
  • alistproducer2 10y ago
    >We're in the middle of some crazy propaganda war right now Agreed. It's like some people somewhere woke up and realized hiring some script kiddies to hack old people that use the same password for all their accounts is a lot cheaper and easier than old-fashioned espionage. The frenzied pace at which all of this is happening reminds me a child with a new toy. >gaslighting from both sides I disagree that Clinton is trying to distort reality. She is more old school - she just stright up lies from time to time. Trump, on the other hand, is quite literally trying to create an alternate reality.
    • gragas 10y ago
      If hundreds of pieces of direct evidence don't suffice, then I'm not sure what does. The Clinton Foundation has done countless extremely illegal and unethical things. Between CTR, the Bernie fiasco, the fake Craigslist ads, the "public and private" positions, I'm not sure how you can say that HRC isn't trying to create an alternate reality.
      • jsutton 10y ago
        What are the countless and extremely illegal and unethical things?
• handelaar 10y ago
  He is, at the instigation of a hostile foreign government, eyeball-deep in criminal activity designed to interfere with a democratic election being conducted by an Ecuadorean ally. Cut off his wifi? Little toad is lucky they just don't boot him out onto the pavement.
  • wavefunction 10y ago
    Your description of the situation is of course opinion, as there has been no proof of allegations that Wikileaks is acting on behalf of anyone other than their own interests.
• Yetanfou 10y ago
  Sweden has hunted Assange for 6 years for the 'crime' of being promiscuous with the wrong women. Oh, and he did not use a condom, but the 'rape victim' still did not mind having dinner with him afterwards. Only later when those two women who thought they'd scored a celebrity found out he'd been rather generous in dealing out his celebrity amongst those who offered him hospitality did they come with a claim of rape. Should he have used a condom? Yes, if only to protect both himself as well as his partners from whatever they managed to share amongst them. Does this constitute rape? Given the fact that they'd had intercourse several times before during the same night I don't the claim would stick. Meanwhile 5 rape suspects were released without even being indicted because the rape victim - a 33yo physically handicapped (wheelchair-bound) Swedish woman - did not 'resist enough' for the allegations of rape to stick, according to the prosecutor [1]. Might it be so that a physically handicapped woman has problems 'resisting enough' due to her handicap and the position in which she was placed - in the toilet, out of reach of her wheelchair? So, Sweden, please define rape for us uninformed bystanders. If forcing a handicapped woman to have sexual intercourse with up to 6 men (5 of whom were arrested, the sixth was never taken) is NOT rape but having more sex with a willing partner who was fine with having sex before IS rape we do need some guidance to know what is right and what is wrong there. It would be good to know given that I live in Sweden, maybe I'm guilty of something I did not realise before? [1] https://www.google.se/search?q=rape+gotland+wheelchair https://www.google.se/search?q=rape+gotland+wheelchair (pick your source)
  • speeder 10y ago
    You also forgot the part where Assange victims said they DON'T want him prosecuted, and only asked the government for help because they wanted a STD test. So basically Assange is prosecuted for rape against two women that claim they weren't actually raped, while doesn't prosecute rape of someone that DID complained of being raped. This cross outright into the non-sensical law land.
  • abjorn 10y ago
    Not that I believe the rape allegations against him are necessarily true, but just because she consented before doesn't mean she consented then. That's a dangerous assumption to make in any situation.
• puppetmaster3 10y ago
  (related) http://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=12720758 http://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=12720758
  • puppetmaster3 10y ago
    https://www.bing.com/videos/search?q=jfk+secrecy+is+repugnant&qpvt=jfk+secrecy+is+repugnant&view=detail&mid=5ABF53882CB77792C08A5ABF53882CB77792C08A&FORM=VRDGAR https://www.bing.com/videos/search?q=jfk+secrecy+is+repugnan...
• puppetmaster3 10y ago
  14 Wikileaks associates are also cut off from the internet: https://twitter.com/danrolle/status/788019208453890048 https://twitter.com/danrolle/status/788019208453890048
  • FireBeyond 10y ago
    I love the double standards on that thread: "This happened! Why? We said so! Gospel truth!" Interfering with the election? "Why? Because they said so? Fool!"
    • AvenueIngres 10y ago
      I know man this is crazy, people are considering persecuted OpenGov activists as more trustworthy and credible than the fricking US Government i.e the most ethical institution in the free world. By the way, did you hear the news? CIA has proof that the Ecuadorian embassy in the UK is hiding WMDs in their basement. What a world!
      • FireBeyond 10y ago
        That's entirely not what I said. People who say "You should trust what I say, because I said it. And not trust them, because I said it." holds little credence with me, regardless of who says it (activist, government, individual) - it's an appeal to authority or sympathy. How much persecution are these people facing, these WikiLeaks activists, day to day?
        • AvenueIngres 10y ago
          Point being: 1/ Not all statements are falsifiable 2/ Not all statements's proof can be verified in a reasonable time by an isolated individual 3/ You need heuristics if your objective is to obtain truth while spending an amount of energy/resources below a threshold x 4/ To compute a statement credibility, you take as input the past history of the source and their obedience to their own moral standards, what vested interest do they have in misdirecting you and the plausibility of said assertion to be true within the current context. The USG does not score well on any of those metrics I am afraid.
• Grazester 10y ago
  Julian Assange is becoming nothing but a menace now. Wikileaks has been releasing people's personal information in their leaks and Assange has an axe to grind with Clinton and is therefore releasing his leaks to influence the election.
• jagermo 10y ago
  PSA: Do not visit the Donald subreddit if you want to stay sane. The tinfoil hats run really hot there.
• TheSockStealer 10y ago
  Before everyone picks up their handy pitchforks and torches (too late?), in times like this I am reminded of Hanlon's razor: "Never attribute to malice that which is adequately explained by stupidity." https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hanlon%27s_razor https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hanlon%27s_razor
• pcl 10y ago
  One would imagine that he could get his hands on a cellular modem or a WiFi signal if he really wanted to.
• ajross 10y ago
  How sure are we that this isn't just a stunt by Assange? He can have visitors in the embassy. All that's required is for someone to hand the guy a burner phone and poof: twitter access! So either he's in custody, or faking the whole thing IMHO. Surely his buddies in London should be able to verify the former, and if they can't they'd surely be screaming like hell that "We can't find Julian!". The fact that everyone is radio silent tells me this is a stunt, honestly.
• dghughes 10y ago
  Did he try turning his router off then on again?
• raesene6 10y ago
  hmm I would suggest there's something more to this than "Internet cut off". There's pretty much no chance you could cut off all connectivity from a building in the heart of london (https://www.google.co.uk/maps/place/Embassy+of+Ecuador/@51.4989645,-0.1636488,17z/data=!3m1!4b1!4m5!3m4!1s0x4876053ed57c44f1:0x4e64e9ae1448cd14!8m2!3d51.4989645!4d-0.1614601 https://www.google.co.uk/maps/place/Embassy+of+Ecuador/@51.4...) From that location you have Base station's covering all 4 major UK mobile networks and I'd guess a large number of wi-fi hotspots. So to "cut off" internet access, you've got to cut all BT lines in and out of the building, block all 3/4G signals all round the building and block each and every wi-fi band around that area, without smegging up all the frequencies in a very central part of london, right next to large shopping areas like Harrods. you cant' just cut off devices known to belong to Assange, as anyone can buy a 4G router with cash from a shop in London which isn't easily attributable to him. oh yeah and I forgot there's the satellite internet bit they'd need to block too.
  • jsprogrammer 10y ago
    Maybe the embassy cut him off? It's not unlikely that a person could be targeted to have communications access disrupted across multiple devices and networks.
    • raesene6 10y ago
      Sure the embassy can just lock him in a room with no devices, that's easy . what's not practical is to cut the ecuadorian embassy building off all together
  • rhino369 10y ago
    You are reading too much into "internet cut off." There is no indication that mobile or satellite connectivity is blocked. Hell there is no real reason to believe that the fiber was actually cut off.
    • raesene6 10y ago
      That's a view, I thought I was explaining why "Internet cut off" was likely not the case (or at least not the only case). Wikileaks are suggesting that he's been cut off by a state actor. I'm pointing out why that's pretty unlikely.
• deleted 10y ago
  [deleted]
• SCdF 10y ago
  Instead of jumping on this as a giant conspiracy, it might be worth considering that it's just that his internet went down. I mean, until there is actual evidence that Hillary Clinton[1] deployed a highly trained collection of seals (the animal, not the US military contingent) to cut through his tube wires in the death of the night and then pelt across hide park and hide in the serpentine, perhaps we should just consider that public services in the UK are incompetent. My internet went down last week, you don't see me reaching for the anti-seal spray. [1] Well, the robot that replaced Hillary Clinton obviously, as we all know she's been dead for 20 years
  • AvenueIngres 10y ago
    1/ Unless you have dumped massive datasets of classified USG data I fail to see how your situation is similar to Assange's. What might be coincidental for you is not when it comes to JA. 2/ Since you post on HN I guess you sure understand that there is no need to alter the physical layer if you want to ostracize a subnetwork from the Internet.
    • SCdF 10y ago
      Except as I understand it, he has a dead man's switch set up, so all severing his internet is going to do is have him leak everything anyway. Also, he's not the only person running Wikileaks , he's mostly the public persona, but there are other people who are not stuck in an embassy right?
      • eumoria 10y ago
        Yea with this being the case it's a little confusing. If they were going to extradite, though, wouldn't that start with officially taking custody? Aka sort of an arrest meaning taking personal devices/access away? I'm sure it's super complicated...
    • cloudjacker 10y ago
      I mean, Wikileaks doesn't host their servers inside the Ecuadorian embassy. They could just time the release of the data in advance, so that they don't need Assange's ongoing internet capabilities to do anything... right? Doesn't that make almost too much sense?
• haberman 10y ago
  I'm still processing this information, and holding out to form a full opinion until more details become available/confirmed. In the meantime, I'm curious, for people who are angry about this: suppose it is actually true that Assange is working together with Russian hackers in an attempt to influence a US election. Do you believe there is any point at which governments should intervene to protect national sovereignty and integrity of the political process? If WikiLeaks was releasing dirt on both candidates I would feel much differently.
  • andrewcoover 10y ago
    agreed. politics isn't a clean sport and it's lopsided to just see one team's dirt laundry.
  • Kequc 10y ago
    There is no evidence Russia is involved. Given what was apparently Podesta's password coupled with a lack of two factor authentication, these leaks wouldn't have exactly required a team of elite hackers. But even if it was Russia. No, you cannot justify a hot war as a result of cyber crime. That is absolutely insane and Clinton is flat out dangerously wrong on that point. The releases expose corruption, it isn't necessarily partisan. Wikileaks used to release documents about George W Bush, and Putin as well.
    • bduerst 10y ago
      >There is no evidence Russia is involved. That's not what the FBI investigation is saying: > Director of National Intelligence James Clapper and Homeland Security Secretary Jeh Johnson said Friday that they are confident that senior-level Russian officials were involved in the hacks. http://www.politico.com/story/2016/10/john-podesta-wikileaks-hack-fbi-statement-229675 http://www.politico.com/story/2016/10/john-podesta-wikileaks...
      • x3n0ph3n3 10y ago
        Because we haven't seen any collusion between the DNC and the FBI this year...
• bedhead 10y ago
  Pretty interesting comparing the reactions to this and Snowden.
• dbg31415 10y ago
  To anyone thinking of voting for HRC... I get it, she's ostensibly better than Trump. But she's still horrible. We have serious problems, problems that will destroy all faith in Government, if left unchecked -- and problems HRC won't address because she's too busy exploiting and expanding them. She prefers 0 transparency -- this runs in total contradiction to democratic values. Anyone who opposed the levels of secrecy under Bush / Cheney should also oppose HRC. The choice isn't Trump or HRC, the choice is to vote your conscience. * Hillary Clinton Liked Covert Action if It Stayed Covert, Transcript Shows - The New York Times || http://www.nytimes.com/2016/10/17/us/politics/hillary-clinton-was-open-to-covert-action-abroad-hacked-transcript-shows.html?_r=0 http://www.nytimes.com/2016/10/17/us/politics/hillary-clinto... * Stone: Secrecy is the Enemy of Democracy | University of Chicago Law School || http://www.law.uchicago.edu/news/stone-secrecy-enemy-democracy http://www.law.uchicago.edu/news/stone-secrecy-enemy-democra...
• Tycho 10y ago
  A lot of people paid a lot of money to get the Clintons into positions of power. A lot of people need to protect their investment.
• chvid 10y ago
  I assume the guy has more than one internet connection (ie. 3G and cable) and that they have all been cut. What is the point of these tweets: pre-commitment 1: John Kerry 4bb96075acadc3d80b5ac872874c3037a386f4f595fe99e687439aabd0219809 pre-commitment 2: Ecuador eae5c9b064ed649ba468f0800abf8b56ae5cfe355b93b1ce90a1b92a48a9ab72 pre-commitment 3: UK FCO f33a6de5c627e3270ed3e02f62cd0c857467a780cf6123d2172d80d02a072f74 ? (From WikiLeak's twitter account.) Are they hashes of some larger documents and somehow verify authenticity? Some kind of keys or passwords? His dead man switch?
  • saint_fiasco 10y ago
    It says pre-commitment so it looks like a dead man switch. If something really bad happens to Assange and someone releases documents about Kerry/Ecuador/FCO we can look at the hashes and see if they match. That way we know it's not some fake leak by an opportunist.
    • airesQ 10y ago
      If that is assassination-insurance should those bytestrings be keys to decrypt files that are already in the wild? Anyhow, I find the tweets very interesting. But I lack the context to know what they mean. Were those tweeted before the blackout? After? The UK FOC thing is particularly interesting. This might sound silly, but perhaps somebody at MI5 was not happy the possibility of Foreign Office correspondence being leaked and decided to something, anything, to stop it from happening.
      • saint_fiasco 10y ago
        They were tweeted just before announcing the blackout. My guess is that when the blackout happened they tweeted the pre-comitment as soon as they could just in case. They are not the keys because nothing that terrible happened yet. All they say is that they have files on those topics, and if someone in the future releases keys to some files, and those decrypted files' signature is as it says on the tweet, then they must come from Wikileaks, since they posted that signature.
• deleted 10y ago
  [deleted]
• markwaldron 10y ago
  What are the odds that Donald Trump has reached out to Assange and made a deal with him? I don't think it would be outside the realm of possibility that Trump would say if he won he'd push for the US to drop charges against Assange (although that doesn't clear him of the charges brought by other countries) in return for Assange releasing whatever information he has on Hillary leading up to the election.
  • 3princip 10y ago
    Considering that Hillary wanted to "drone" him, it's a safe bet Trump can hardly be worse, deal or no deal.
• heisenbit 10y ago
  Wikileaks was about sharing facts. Wikileaks today is about curating facts, interpretation and using facts towards an end. The "fact" state actor w/o proof is another step away from the roots.
  • gjolund 10y ago
    Wikileaks was leaking stuff I agreed with. Now it isn't. Wikileaks is bad.
• Tomte 10y ago
  Ecuadorian president Correa is outgoing, not running for another term. There will be a new president in a few months and it is almost inconceivable that a new president could be nearly as accomodating as Correa towards Assange. Something is going to happen in the next few months. Question is, how much agency does Assange really have left?
• xir78 10y ago
  Did he try restarting his router and modem?
• ComteDeLaFere 10y ago
  From the article - "There was no way to immediately verify if he had been knocked offline, and if so, how a state actor was suspected." As far as I can tell, no one has verified any of this. Given JA's recent bizarre state of mind, I'm not sure where all of this breathless HN commentary is coming from.
  • niftich 10y ago
    How could one verify this?
    • ComteDeLaFere 10y ago
      You just proved my point. How does he know it's a "state actor"?
      • khattam 10y ago
        >How does he know it's a "state actor"? You'd have to ask him that. Unfortunately, he is not allowed to talk.
• wbhart 10y ago
  Ecuador's Foreign Minister Guillaume Long recently noted [1] that the embassy has problems with internet connection and telephone and that it was their belief the connection was being interfered with (hacked). It is very likely Assange knows the difference between an internet connection that is just suffering an outage, and an internet connection that has been deliberately cut. If the "outage" only affects the embassy, and no other clients on the same fibre, and if the ISP is unable to give information due to "security issues", that would for example, be a big red flag, I would imagine (I have no insight into what the situation really is, I'm just giving a for instance). Wikileaks also seems to be a broadly decentralised organisation, from what little they've given away in past press releases about how they operate. I'm sure I remember they once boasted about their crypto phones, etc. So it is unlikely Assange has lost contact with the world, or that he personally is maintaining their Twitter feed. The issue here is more what this portends, rather than what it might do to Wikileaks. [1] http://www.telesurtv.net/english/news/London-Threatens-Quito-Over-Assange-Ecuador-Foreign-Minister-20160626-0022.html http://www.telesurtv.net/english/news/London-Threatens-Quito...
• puppetmaster3 10y ago
  http://imgur.com/d1XcYp6 http://imgur.com/d1XcYp6 Twitter has deleted whatever periscopes that were near or around the Ecuadorian embassy.
• alexandercrohde 10y ago
  I think we should modify the Geneva convention to make cutting internet access illegal. I think everybody should have the freedom to express their ideology, even if jailed. It has always been legal to write letters from prison, it should be a fundamental right to express dissent, particularly when it's political.
  • angry-hacker 10y ago
    Publishing from prison as a service? Maybe there is market for it...
• nickysielicki 10y ago
  HN was particularly skilled at seeing through the FUD around the FBI iPhone crack, and this forum has also held a healthy skepticism for the way in which the FBI was able to break Tor and find DPR of Silk Road. I don't think it's an outrageous claim to say that in general, a sizable portion of this website (though perhaps still a minority) believes that the FBI has historically held-back information to the point of it being dishonest-- particularly with regards to statements they make around technology. Is that fair to say? In the interest of full disclosure, I tend to lean more conservative than most people, especially relative to HN. So maybe I have my partisan goggles on here, but why are so many people buying into the idea that there is solid evidence that Russia is actually behind these leaks? Details are incredibly hard to come by. Try doing a Google search and look for yourself. You'll find dozens of articles that rehash the joint DHS and FBI statement (dare I link to submarine.html?), and after a couple pages you'll find their statement itself, but none of these articles or statements contain actual details for why they believe what they believe around these more recent hacks, which, to me, is indicative of a huge problem in and of itself with our media-- not (necessarily) bias like the Trump camp is saying, but simply a lack of basic technical intuition to question a basic premise. It happened with the iPhone, it happened (to a lesser degree) with Silk Road, and I think it's happening here, too. Pew research from 2014 said there was a little bit under 4MM people working in the tech sector in the US. For comparison, a quick Google suggests suggests there are roughly 1.25MM lawyers in this country. And yet, when a controversial court decision is made and journalists are expected to write on it, the press generally is able to grok the arguments made and summarize it in some form. If a presser is held, they are capable of asking relevant questions and challenging things. I don't think that's the case when it comes to anything related to computers, and I think that's indicative that our liberal arts colleges are failing to stay up-to-date. They are creating well-rounded individuals that are prepared for life in the 1990's. If you go to J-School, you get a short but sweet background in political science and maybe some philosophy and maybe even logic... But as far as I'm aware, if you don't graduate with a degree in CS, everything that you understand about computers is done on your own time, and that's not hyperbole. Anyway, as I understand it, the DHS and FBI believed that the DNC leaks came from Russia entirely because some tools were left behind on a couple vulnerable machines, and these tools were used before by Russian state actors. I think I read somewhere that there was an IP embedded within these tools that had been used by Russia before... So the narrative is basically that these professional state-backed hackers did not try to mask their identity whatsoever, and left a card saying, "Russia wuz h3r3, lel!". And to be clear, maybe that's 100% what happened. I don't know! But the point I'm trying to make is that I don't think anyone can say that they "know" who was behind these hacks with any kind of confidence. And I can understand why that would be good enough for journalists who don't know better. And with the media reporting this so widely, I can understand how this would permeate into the general population. But I think a lot of Hillary supporters around here are subduing their skepticism to avoid cognitive dissonance, and I think that sucks.
• nstj 10y ago
  675 comments and no one actually knows what we're talking about. What does "cut" mean? Why can't he just use a hotspot?
  • dancek 10y ago
    https://twitter.com/wikileaks/status/788099178832420865 https://twitter.com/wikileaks/status/788099178832420865 So if Ecuador decided to cut his internet access, they may just have confiscated every device Assange has.
    • nstj 10y ago
      Makes perfect sense with that knowledge. Thanks for the heads up.
• deleted 10y ago
  [deleted]
• JD557 10y ago
  WikiLeaks just released more information about this: https://twitter.com/wikileaks/status/788099178832420865 https://twitter.com/wikileaks/status/788099178832420865 >We can confirm Ecuador cut off Assange's internet access Saturday, 5pm GMT, shortly after publication of Clinton's Goldman Sachs speechs.
• fnordo 10y ago
  According to Wikileaks it's the Ecuadorian Embassy that cut his access. "We can confirm Ecuador cut off Assange's internet access Saturday, 5pm GMT, shortly after publication of Clinton's Goldman Sachs speechs."
  • tptacek 10y ago
    I'm absolutely just shocked that it was his own hosts that cut him off.
• novalis78 10y ago
  Interesting documentary from Project Veritas Action https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5IuJGHuIkzY https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5IuJGHuIkzY just published today.
• Overtonwindow 10y ago
  I saw something a moment ago that Ecuador cut his internet. Anyone know of why this would have happened?
• toehead2000 10y ago
  The article doesn't say whether he tried turning it off and then turning it on again...
• colordrops 10y ago
  If you haven't noticed the media collusion you are both blind and dumb.
  • pcwalton 10y ago
    I'm pretty unhappy that this is what passes for discourse on HN now.
    • colordrops 10y ago
      I apologize. I don't typically submit to this kind of discussion myself, but ended up committing the same crime as the person I was responding to.
    • deleted 10y ago
      [deleted]
  • sctb 10y ago
    We detached this subthread from https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=12728559 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=12728559 and marked it off-topic.
• tschiller 10y ago
  Assange has been scheduled to be interrogated by Sweden today (October 17th) since at least mid-September [1]. Both the internet outage and the pre-commitments are likely related to that. For more analysis (and the evaluate the evidence yourself), follow along at https://www.opensynthesis.org/boards/14/who-cut-wikileaks-founder-julian-assange-s-internet-access/ https://www.opensynthesis.org/boards/14/who-cut-wikileaks-fo... [1] http://www.cnn.com/2016/08/11/europe/julian-assange-questioning-ecuador-sweden/ http://www.cnn.com/2016/08/11/europe/julian-assange-question...
• puppetmaster3 10y ago
  Question to Hillary: Isn't it a fact that the product that U are actually selling is US government policy?
• pjlegato 10y ago
  The "state actor" is Ecuador: http://www.wsj.com/articles/wikileaks-says-state-party-disrupted-assanges-internet-connection-1476714296 http://www.wsj.com/articles/wikileaks-says-state-party-disru...