5 ms·

I'm definitely interested in how they justify this in comparison to Wikileaks. BlueLeaks certainly had sensitive information about victims and others that are i

• ubertaco 6y ago
  I wonder how much of this has to do with the stripping-away of Section 230 protections that was started/attempted recently. A bit more paranoid response to published content that could create legal issues for Twitter now.
• kanox 6y ago
  From the article: > The group’s account, @DDoSecrets, was permanently suspended, a Twitter spokesperson told Gizmodo, citing the company’s policy against the distribution of hacked materials. The policy specifically prohibits accounts from sharing “content obtained through hacking that contains private information, may put people in harm or danger, or contains trade secrets.”
  • easterncalculus 6y ago
    I did actually see that, on second thought I worded my OP in a way that sounded like they didn't comment at all, when I was referring to if they would compare it to how they handled Wikileaks in their response. So I guess trade secrets are not in these leaks, but private information is certainly what Wikileaks is about. I think that the information of innocent people is more than enough reason not to host it, though. Just figured they'd want to clear the air of any accusations of favoritism.