7 ms·

There's an old fashioned concept that a thing known by only you is a secret. A thing you've told somebody else, is just on a countdown to being public informat

There's an old fashioned concept that a thing known by only you is a secret. A thing you've told somebody else, is just on a countdown to being public information. The journalists obviously fucked Assange by being idiots, but he is 100% culpable for putting the information somewhere it could be leaked in the first place. I simply don't think it has any bearing on the case at all.

simion314 6y ago
I read that if you keep the password only in 1 head then you just painted a giant target on that head, where if you have it shared to a few trusted people if one of them is "suicided" then you can release the secrets so you have a way to prevent the assassinations attempts.
- zentiggr 6y ago
  I'm pretty sure that's not what David Leigh was doing. Publishing the password was total gross unprofessional incompetent foolishness. Or possibly at that point the Guardian "investigative" unit was already trying to poison the whole story. Or he was just a damn idiot.
  - simion314 6y ago
    Yeah, I was suggesting that is not a good idea to keep the password only in 1 person head/home , it is an invitation to get assassinated. You could be right but I fail to see any relation with my comment(maybe is my fault and expressed my idea badly= I know that he did not reveal the password to protect Assanges life).
k1m 6y ago
> A thing you've told somebody else, is just on a countdown to being public information. This wasn't just "somebody else", this was the senior Guardian investigative journalist David Leigh, who was working with Assange to redact and publish the information in the Guardian. Assange was reluctant to give him the password, but was badgered into it by Leigh. > he is 100% culpable for putting the information somewhere it could be leaked in the first place The information was only available in encrypted form, and not made public. All the testimony from people involved in the redaction process show that Assange was very careful, while the Guardian's David Leigh was impatient and careless, and ultimately published the password in his book. I don't see why you think that has no bearing on the case. Here's testimony from computer science professor Christian Grothoff: > [Prosecutor] Smith: So in summer 2010 David Leigh was given a password and the cache was put up on a public website? > Grothoff: No, it was put on a website but not public. It was in a hidden directory. > Smith: So how did it end up on mirror sites if not public? > Grothoff: It depends how the specific mirror is created. On the Wikileaks site the encrypted cache was not an available field. Different mirroring techniques might sweep up archive files. > Smith: Wikileaks had asked for the creation of mirrors? > Grothoff: Yes. > Smith: The strength of a password is irrelevant if you cannot control the people who have it. > Grothoff: That is true. The human is always the weakest link in the system. It is difficult to guard against a bad faith actor, like David Leigh. > Smith: How many people did Wikileaks give the key in the summer of 2010? > Grothoff: It appears from his book only to David Leigh. He then gave it to the hundreds of thousands who had access to his book. https://www.craigmurray.org.uk/archives/2020/09/your-man-in-the-public-gallery-assange-hearing-day-14/ https://www.craigmurray.org.uk/archives/2020/09/your-man-in-... At some other point it's pointed out that those following the mirroring instructions provided by Wikileaks would not have received the encrypted file. Suggesting the intention wasn't to have that particular file mirrored.

simion314 6y ago

I read that if you keep the password only in 1 head then you just painted a giant target on that head, where if you have it shared to a few trusted people if one of them is "suicided" then you can release the secrets so you have a way to prevent the assassinations attempts.

zentiggr 6y ago
I'm pretty sure that's not what David Leigh was doing. Publishing the password was total gross unprofessional incompetent foolishness. Or possibly at that point the Guardian "investigative" unit was already trying to poison the whole story. Or he was just a damn idiot.
- simion314 6y ago
  Yeah, I was suggesting that is not a good idea to keep the password only in 1 person head/home , it is an invitation to get assassinated. You could be right but I fail to see any relation with my comment(maybe is my fault and expressed my idea badly= I know that he did not reveal the password to protect Assanges life).

k1m 6y ago

> A thing you've told somebody else, is just on a countdown to being public information. This wasn't just "somebody else", this was the senior Guardian investigative journalist David Leigh, who was working with Assange to redact and publish the information in the Guardian. Assange was reluctant to give him the password, but was badgered into it by Leigh. > he is 100% culpable for putting the information somewhere it could be leaked in the first place The information was only available in encrypted form, and not made public. All the testimony from people involved in the redaction process show that Assange was very careful, while the Guardian's David Leigh was impatient and careless, and ultimately published the password in his book. I don't see why you think that has no bearing on the case. Here's testimony from computer science professor Christian Grothoff: > [Prosecutor] Smith: So in summer 2010 David Leigh was given a password and the cache was put up on a public website? > Grothoff: No, it was put on a website but not public. It was in a hidden directory. > Smith: So how did it end up on mirror sites if not public? > Grothoff: It depends how the specific mirror is created. On the Wikileaks site the encrypted cache was not an available field. Different mirroring techniques might sweep up archive files. > Smith: Wikileaks had asked for the creation of mirrors? > Grothoff: Yes. > Smith: The strength of a password is irrelevant if you cannot control the people who have it. > Grothoff: That is true. The human is always the weakest link in the system. It is difficult to guard against a bad faith actor, like David Leigh. > Smith: How many people did Wikileaks give the key in the summer of 2010? > Grothoff: It appears from his book only to David Leigh. He then gave it to the hundreds of thousands who had access to his book. https://www.craigmurray.org.uk/archives/2020/09/your-man-in-the-public-gallery-assange-hearing-day-14/ https://www.craigmurray.org.uk/archives/2020/09/your-man-in-... At some other point it's pointed out that those following the mirroring instructions provided by Wikileaks would not have received the encrypted file. Suggesting the intention wasn't to have that particular file mirrored.