> I do tech DD for a living and from my own experience it is very hard to fudge the record for someone who deals with this kind of thing regularly. I assume it

> I do tech DD for a living and from my own experience it is very hard to fudge the record for someone who deals with this kind of thing regularly. I assume it would be hard to pre-redact documents to hide your omissions. Outright omission of documents from a dump would be harder to detect in my view. But I must admit I'm ignorant of the techniques available. > I though I had covered any fears about source exposure and being believable with my two suggestions for who could do this. Partly. In my view it's up to the sources to decide who gets to see the original dump. They chose Wikileaks. Maybe they did so for reasons we'd judge nefarious but we are not free to assume they'd agree with sharing the originals more widely. > Openleaks and the Intercept come to mind. Did they get dumps Wikileaks had published before? Where the version published by Wikileaks turned out to have been selectively redacted for political reasons?