4 ms·

That's not really true b/c even leaked to the public top secret documents remain top secret in government circles. It's why government employees are specifical

by MWil 13y ago

That's not really true b/c even leaked to the public top secret documents remain top secret in government circles. It's why government employees are specifically told not to seek out wikileaks or snowden documents - you can't gain "legitimate" access to those documents through the public. Unless through all the noise I've missed where the govt. has said this or that document in particular is in fact genuine. I'm not saying it hasn't happened but I haven't seen it. Even acknowledgement of a program (PRISM, for example) isn't acknowledgement of PRISM slide #4, although it does make it's authenticity more likely than not.

rdl 13y ago
Counterintelligence people are still allowed to look at the leaked documents, and (through the proper channels) make statements about them. It's the rank-and-file people who aren't supposed to look at this stuff, and that's mainly to avoid two things: 1) Disclosing additional information, or inadvertently attesting to the validity of documents. (obvious attack: release two plausible contradictory "top secret" documents" which cover the whole space you care about; when people discredit one, you have strong evidence of the latter.) 2) Complicating later CI investigations -- if MAJ Snuffy has downloaded wikileaks docs onto his personal laptop, and a scan finds a bunch of TS/NOFORNicate documents on it (heh), it will be a false positive. If SSG Evil wants to exfiltrate documents, she can just fill a laptop with wikileaks stuff and her own documents and then, if caught, claim it was just wikileaks downloads. But CI investigators are allowed to touch this stuff. Just like some FBI people see child porn all the time (which has to be one of the shittiest jobs in infosec).
Crito 13y ago
Yeah, I'm not talking about random DoD employees calling out the documents as fabrications on Reddit... My point is that although the government has not officially declared the documents to be authentic, their failure to merely laugh them off as obvious fakes created by a kook is more than telling.
- MWil 13y ago
  You say "the only parties" claiming these are fake as if there isn't the third option of being in a holding pattern until more can be determined as to the authenticity of the documents, or not. But that's what I'd do if I were in the govt's place - not immediately say one way or another and actually think about how wrong that could go.
  - Crito 13y ago
    Except they are not in a holding pattern. Rather they are trying to justify everything. If these were really fake, it would not be taking this long for us to hear about it. If these documents being fakes is really your theory, then you are delusional.
- saraid216 13y ago
  > My point is that although the government has not officially declared the documents to be authentic, their failure to merely laugh them off as obvious fakes created by a kook is more than telling. Um. It's ridiculously bad PR to respond to every such claim. The best possible scenario is that a couple people will take your word for it. Most people will instead just take such a response as a legitimization of the criticism. You might be particularly credulous and accept the government's say-so, but I wouldn't.
  - Crito 13y ago
    > "Um. It's ridiculously bad PR to respond to every such claim." There have been responses, just no accusations of fabrication....

by MWil 13y ago

rdl 13y ago

Counterintelligence people are still allowed to look at the leaked documents, and (through the proper channels) make statements about them. It's the rank-and-file people who aren't supposed to look at this stuff, and that's mainly to avoid two things: 1) Disclosing additional information, or inadvertently attesting to the validity of documents. (obvious attack: release two plausible contradictory "top secret" documents" which cover the whole space you care about; when people discredit one, you have strong evidence of the latter.) 2) Complicating later CI investigations -- if MAJ Snuffy has downloaded wikileaks docs onto his personal laptop, and a scan finds a bunch of TS/NOFORNicate documents on it (heh), it will be a false positive. If SSG Evil wants to exfiltrate documents, she can just fill a laptop with wikileaks stuff and her own documents and then, if caught, claim it was just wikileaks downloads. But CI investigators are allowed to touch this stuff. Just like some FBI people see child porn all the time (which has to be one of the shittiest jobs in infosec).

Crito 13y ago

Yeah, I'm not talking about random DoD employees calling out the documents as fabrications on Reddit... My point is that although the government has not officially declared the documents to be authentic, their failure to merely laugh them off as obvious fakes created by a kook is more than telling.

MWil 13y ago
You say "the only parties" claiming these are fake as if there isn't the third option of being in a holding pattern until more can be determined as to the authenticity of the documents, or not. But that's what I'd do if I were in the govt's place - not immediately say one way or another and actually think about how wrong that could go.
- Crito 13y ago
  Except they are not in a holding pattern. Rather they are trying to justify everything. If these were really fake, it would not be taking this long for us to hear about it. If these documents being fakes is really your theory, then you are delusional.
saraid216 13y ago
> My point is that although the government has not officially declared the documents to be authentic, their failure to merely laugh them off as obvious fakes created by a kook is more than telling. Um. It's ridiculously bad PR to respond to every such claim. The best possible scenario is that a couple people will take your word for it. Most people will instead just take such a response as a legitimization of the criticism. You might be particularly credulous and accept the government's say-so, but I wouldn't.
- Crito 13y ago
  > "Um. It's ridiculously bad PR to respond to every such claim." There have been responses, just no accusations of fabrication....