3 ms·
The NSA's statement had a lot of weasel-words in it, and Julian Assange explicitly denied that the emails came from a Russian source. Do most HN commenters bel
by MichaelBurge 10y ago
The NSA's statement had a lot of weasel-words in it, and Julian Assange explicitly denied that the emails came from a Russian source.
Do most HN commenters believe that Assange is outright lying?
- cypherpunks01 10y agoWikileaks staff have generally responded- "We receive information anonymously, through an anonymous submission platform. We do not need to know the identity of the source, neither do we want to know it.", most recently in the AMA https://www.reddit.com/r/IAmA/comments/5c8u9l/we_are_the_wikileaks_staff_despite_our_editor/ https://www.reddit.com/r/IAmA/comments/5c8u9l/we_are_the_wik... If correct (and I'm inclined to believe them here as it's a key component of their process), then they would have no knowledge one way or another as to who the true submitter really was. I think Assange is bending the truth by denying the source of the submission—if his staff's statement is true then he would have no way of knowing. Under Occam's Razor I'd conclude that they got played in the exact way that was intended.
- JohnStrange 10y agoIt seems very likely to me that the NSA has means to determine the origin of the source that Assange does not have. He's as easy to fool as any other single person who sits in an embassy with a laptop. So yeah, I would give more credibility to the NSA than to Assange in this case, without any need to accuse him of lying.
- MK999 10y agoNot sure what the DNC did to gain HN commenters undying loyalty. :|