9 ms·
Macron emails leaked by wikileaks
- subroutine 9y agoIs there a wikileak bias or do conservatives have better infosec?
- Sawamara 9y agoYou cant be leaked on if you do not use technology! runs away
- _Codemonkeyism 9y agohttps://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pentagon_Papers https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pentagon_Papers "Now opposing the war, Ellsberg and his friend Anthony Russo photocopied the study in October 1969 intending to disclose it."
- rangibaby 9y agoI read that the Russian intelligence services are still using typewriters for exactly this reason
- pricechild 9y agoWhich reminds me of this great story: https://arstechnica.com/information-technology/2015/10/how-soviets-used-ibm-selectric-keyloggers-to-spy-on-us-diplomats/ https://arstechnica.com/information-technology/2015/10/how-s...
- pjc50 9y agoThere's definitely a bias. That's why the last paragraph of that announcement is there; that's wikileaks denying that they're a front for Russian intelligence, an allegation which is being made a lot these days.
- arethuza 9y agoPerhaps they learned after the Nixon tapes?
- deleted 9y ago[deleted]
- Super_Jambo 9y agoWorth reading Julian Assange's blog on the purpose of wikileaks. http://cryptome.org/0002/ja-conspiracies.pdf http://cryptome.org/0002/ja-conspiracies.pdf To me the answer is that America's current "Left wing" is more in-line with the American Neoliberal world dominance agenda. Meanwhile Americas conservatives where they promote American dominance do so in public. Republican candidates debated candidly about how much they'd like the "bad guys" to get tortured. Meanwhile the DNCs favoured candidate got big donations from the defence industry and Saudi Arabia whilst talking about how important human rights are. Wikileaks project is about attacking powerful in-groups deception of voters. All leaks help this cause by increasing the info-sec cost of conspiracy. But if the in-groups private messaging is in line with their publicly stated positions then what's there to leak?
- thomask0 9y agoExcept Trump/Tillersion just happily approved the biggest arms deal with Saudi, while the previous Obama administration was halting this deal because of human right violations in Yemen. Iran deal was also in the line to reduce Saudi's influence on foreign policy.
- subroutine 9y ago> if the in-groups private messaging is in line with their publicly stated positions then what's there to leak? 1. We won't know unless there is a leak 2. I think the fact that there was a leak was as or more damaging to Clinton than the actual leak itself. Anecdotal... My dad: "but the emails!" Me: "what about them?" Dad: "They were hacked". Me: "what did they say?" Dad: "..." 3. So you're saying, yes there is a clear bias?
- moomin 9y agoThis answer would make sense if Wikileaks were the source of the leaks. As it is, they're not, so their motives don't really come into it. Besides, I'm pretty sure what DTjr did would qualify as eminently leakable.
- Super_Jambo 9y agoThis is good point, although we don't know if WL is getting right wing stuff and just not leaking it.
- icebraining 9y agoMacron is not exactly left-wing.
- akhilcacharya 9y agoHe is socially and culturally progressive - so he counts.
- Majestic121 9y agoI think there might be nuance in the way US and France see the political scale, but I guarantee that he is not considered left here. At best center, but since his last policies (cutting rent assistance, giving tax breaks to the rich), even the "center" image starts crumbling
- stuaxo 9y agoIndeed - language has been co-opted. In the UK we see the same thing "moderate" "centrist" - these now mean big-business friendly policies, to the right of previous right wing governments.
- chvid 9y agoThere is probably (as this point) a political bias amongst people providing leaks to wikileaks. The Trump administration has had plenty of leaks but they have all been published by traditional media (NY Times, CNN and so on).
- akhilcacharya 9y ago"Leaks".
- KGIII 9y agoStuff was leaked while Bush was in office. One of the more memorable was the Blair-Bush documents.
- tnone 9y agoConservatives score much higher on loyalty and respect for authority as their moral foundations. Wouldn't surprise me if that's enough to explain the gap.
- go13 9y agoI wonder why we never had any info on Le Pen, Trump or Russia from there?
- patkai 9y agoLe Pen and Putin probably don't write emails and Trump is tweeting :) But I agree, it is hard to follow the ethics of this, to say the least. Also, if I were sent leaked documents, it would be incredibly hard to understand and consider the ethics.
- dullgiulio 9y agoAnd they don't have aids that write e-mail either? I don't believe they all use letters with some wax to imprint their ring: it's 2017. The parent is right, Wikileaks has a murky agenda.
- vim_wannabe 9y agoSo because Wikileaks has had a couple of leaks from Hillary's crew and this Macron one among all the other ones [0] means they have a murky agenda? Or do you mean the recent Vault 7 from CIA etc are also part of this newly found dark agenda, instead of a continuation of earlier leaks such as the Iraq War documents leak? [0] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikileaks#Leaks https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikileaks#Leaks
- varjag 9y agoAssange (let's get rid of pseudo-plurality of Wikileaks) has clearly observable political agenda, and it hasn't changed much. As long as it harms the United States and its allies, it will be disseminated. If it's something that implicates the "anti-imperialists" like Le Pen, Trump, Putin and their petty dictator buddies (e.g. Panama Files) it will be booed and downplayed by him.
- r721 9y agoThere was a leak from Vladislav Surkov, personal adviser of Vladimir Putin among other functions: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Surkov_leaks https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Surkov_leaks Apparently Assange wasn't interested in publicizing that one.
- mads 9y agoSomeone is using Bitcoin to buy crystal meth: Model Quantity Price Total 3-MMC - Crystal: 10g 3-MMC 1 180.00€ 180.00€ Sub-Total: 180.00€Discount
- wineDineSixty9 9y agoFrom https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=14351829 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=14351829 'This article claims that the first of these, the forged document, was done by Weev (aka Andrew Auernheimer). However, the second of these - the email data dump - has not been attributed to Weev and was likely done by someone else.' 'Weev is a high functioning polydrug abusing sociopath dedicated to short term pleasure. Don't confuse yourself.' Interesting... wonder if this 'weev' planted some emails in the dump
- LyndsySimon 9y ago> Interesting... wonder if this 'weev' planted some emails in the dump I'm not aware of a means of falsifying DKIM signatures for emails.
- soVeryTired 9y agoThe DKIM sig wasn't verified for this particular email.
- Overtonwindow 9y agoHere we go again.
- odc 9y agoIt seems 90% of the emails are just newsletters (LeMonde, Korben, Google Alerts...). It would have been so easy to remove those!
- grp 9y agoRather 40% newsletters, 40% expense reports (note de frais).
- dagenleg 9y agoIt's so incredibly annoying that every time there's a news article about wikileaks people start crying about its bias and Russian spies. Even if Satan himself feeds them info, so what? What matters is the truthfulness of their leaks. It seem to me like a lot of people avoid attacking the verasity of the leaks themselves but focus only on the 'Putin connection', which is of course a much easier thing to do. Well, hey, it's modern world politics, where it's not the objective truth that really matters or the argumentation, it's a 'who can shout the loudest' contest instead.
- archagon 9y agoNo, screw that approach. Truth is not just a collection of facts; it's also the point cloud that the facts create. Even if your information is 100% accurate, you can still generate incredibly potent misinformation by selectively releasing some facts and retaining others. It's bias laundering, and it creates propaganda that's substantially more difficult to discredit than the old-school, lie-based kind. We should really know better, but I suppose it plays to our human weaknesses. I say that every time WikiLeaks comes up, "Assange should not be trusted" needs to be the top comment. No different than a "view at your own discretion" label.
- vim_wannabe 9y agoOut of interest: who could be trusted with releasing accurate facts but not withholding any? The 17 intelligence agencies? 97% of scientists?
- archagon 9y ago> The 17 intelligence agencies? Probably not. > 97% of scientists? Probably yes. Also, news organizations with transparency and decades-old reputations, e.g. the BBC. But certainly not a secretive <s>anarchist</s> libertarian organization with an egomaniac leader[1] and questionable political connections. [1]: https://www.lrb.co.uk/v36/n05/andrew-ohagan/ghosting https://www.lrb.co.uk/v36/n05/andrew-ohagan/ghosting
- throwawaymanbot 9y agoI'll be more interested in truthfulness of leaks when Assange leaks Putins emails.
- dsfyu404ed 9y agoPlease don't post direct links to Wikileaks or any other site that hosts leaked classified material (even if the link is not to classified material). By posting a direct link you are excluding the people who have the most well informed opinions on the subject. Even just linking to a clickbait piece that provides a link to the source material is better.
- subroutine 9y agoAppologies. I reposted to an ABC piece. Question though... how does this exclude people who are already well informed from commenting on this forum? And how does a clickbait article rectify this?
- dsfyu404ed 9y agoThank you. A little more detail. Anyone working for the gov't, a gov't contractor, the defense industry or other industries requiring a clearance would do well to avoid this stuff. Being able to honestly answer "I've read the third party analysis but haven't seen more than quotes from the docs myself" makes life easier if the person administering your poly decides to ask about that sort of stuff. Linking directly to wikileaks also means that nobody working in those environments will read your article while at work or using a work device. While you might not get asked about it depending on where you work it's just unprofessional. It's like visiting a link to a tech article published by Pornhub's blog. By giving those groups a reason to avoid the topic you eliminate a lot of potential for transfer of useful information. Little tidbits like "the author says X but in my experience Y" add up to a large amount of knowledge transfer that we probably don't want to exclude from this site
- subroutine 9y agoThanks, I thought it was bullshit, but now I know for sure.