Alleged Wikileaks Use of P2P to Siphon Documents

[Tyler Durden]

I noticed that certain descriptions of the Wikileaks extraction of P2P files
tried to link this form of extraction to "hacking", particularly as some of
those files were extracted via surreptitious P2P. Of course, this was an
attempt to throw up some dust and create a plausible scenario under which
Wikileaks could be accused of actively obtaining the files. (I've seen some
other attempts to suggest that Wikileaks paid Manning for the files).

Meanwhile, I haven't yet seen an indictment or anything here in the US. Did I
miss something? At this juncture, is it possible that they just can't find
anything convincing enough to indict Assange or Wikileaks with?

I still say hooray for Wikileaks, hooray for Assange. Did he do it for his own
personal glory? Hell yeah, but that just further proves he's the Rock Star(TM)
of the Cypherpunks.
-TD

> Date: Thu, 20 Jan 2011 17:53:15 -0500
> To: coderman at gmail.com; cypherpunks at al-qaeda.net
> From: jya at pipeline.com
> Subject: Re: Alleged Wikileaks Use of P2P to Siphon Documents
>
> It may be that the cybersec wizard encountered a TLA sting being
> run on P2P -- those exact six IP addresses among tens of thousands,
> each wearing a sign that says Wikileaks right here, log us.
>
> Someone writes that the USG has been seeding P2P with bogus files
> for quite a while in order to trace their arranged discovery and
> appearance elsewhere. Following the lead and using the means
> and methoids of the copyright pig kissers.
>
> To be sure that is what the USG and its contractors would claim to
> cover their ineptitude. Meanwhile, using old style bribing, burgling,
> paying lawyers and journalists and whistleblowers and hackers and
> goofy soldiers to entrap would-be info liberators, then turning those
> captured into pig kissers.
>
> No disrespect to pig kissers, they happily admit to doing whatever
> is necessary to outwit professionals.