[Biggins]

AES 256

Make sure you download a copy of the decryption program as well, and just keep on your computer in case you want to use it.
Link to www.aescrypt.com

The password key so far has not been released to the public but at this net war goes on by the hour, that moment might come soon.

[sponsoredwalk]

This is the old file they put up? If so that means that everything is on that
file in unedited form I guess & we are to expect a lot more.

[Biggins]

Apparently as we speak according to a Wikileaks lawyer on the news a short while ago, their servers (that are still up and running) at numerous locations are under attack, each on their own, around the world.

[Amalgam]

Interesting tidbit posted on Boing Boing:

I wonder if the US government will be able to lean on the .ORG people to have the domain seized or revoked? WikiLeaks has its mirror at wikileaks.info, but they're headquartered in Ireland and I'd imagine the authorities there are susceptible to US pressure. So what TLD do you choose if you want robust domain registration?

http://www.boingboing.net/2010/12/02...rg-domain.html

[Amalgam]

..and again.

http://aws.amazon.com/message/65348/

There have been reports that a government inquiry prompted us not to serve WikiLeaks any longer. That is inaccurate.

There have also been reports that it was prompted by massive DDOS attacks. That too is inaccurate. There were indeed large-scale DDOS attacks, but they were successfully defended against.

Amazon Web Services (AWS) rents computer infrastructure on a self-service basis. AWS does not pre-screen its customers, but it does have terms of service that must be followed. WikiLeaks was not following them. There were several parts they were violating. For example, our terms of service state that “you represent and warrant that you own or otherwise control all of the rights to the content… that use of the content you supply does not violate this policy and will not cause injury to any person or entity.” It’s clear that WikiLeaks doesn’t own or otherwise control all the rights to this classified content. Further, it is not credible that the extraordinary volume of 250,000 classified documents that WikiLeaks is publishing could have been carefully redacted in such a way as to ensure that they weren’t putting innocent people in jeopardy. Human rights organizations have in fact written to WikiLeaks asking them to exercise caution and not release the names or identities of human rights defenders who might be persecuted by their governments.

We’ve been running AWS for over four years and have hundreds of thousands of customers storing all kinds of data on AWS. Some of this data is controversial, and that’s perfectly fine. But, when companies or people go about securing and storing large quantities of data that isn’t rightfully theirs, and publishing this data without ensuring it won’t injure others, it’s a violation of our terms of service, and folks need to go operate elsewhere.

We look forward to continuing to serve our AWS customers and are excited about several new things we have coming your way in the next few months.

— Amazon Web Services

[bnt]

Note that they also have a new domain name, http://wikileaks.ch/ , which is currently redirecting to an IP address. That's all they need, really - it doesn't matter where the servers are, as long as people can get to them.

[bnt]

Note that they also have a new domain name, http://wikileaks.ch/ , which is currently redirecting to an IP address at an ISP in Paris. That's all they need, really - it doesn't matter where the servers are, as long as people can get to them.

[KyussBishop]

It seems the Guardian website is either being crippled due to popularity of the Q&A, or through a DDoS attack.

Amalgam: The Irish hosting was with Amazon's web servers in Ireland, which is what was pulled.

Also, Amazon's statement there doesn't really match up with what they did, or with the content WikiLeaks was actually hosting; there was a good article I read in response to it earlier, but I can't find it atm.

[Biggins]

Originally Posted by KyussBishop

It seems the Guardian website is either being crippled due to popularity of the Q&A, or through a DDoS attack.

Yea, seems to be having problems showing latest comments and replies.

[Biggins]

Backlash as Amazon pulls WikiLeaks server

Julian Assange and his staff worked without sleep last night to reinstate WikiLeaks after Amazon.com pulled the website from its servers under political pressure from the US.

WikiLeaks and a separate website set up by Mr Assange to host thousands of leaked diplomatic cables were both taken off Amazon’s servers yesterday, 24 hours after the US online company was contacted by the staff of Joe Lieberman, chairman of the Senate’s Committee on Homeland Security.

They were unavailable for at least five hours while programmers working with Mr Assange struggled to find a replacement host.

“The company’s decision to cut off WikiLeaks now is the right decision and should set the standard for other companies WikiLeaks is using to distribute its illegally seized material,” Mr Lieberman said.

Amazon’s decision caused consternation among some observers, who pointed out that Amazon servers still hosted material from the New York Times and the Guardian newspapers, both of which carry full copies of the leaked cables.

A widely re-posted comment on Twitter read: “Truth is priceless! This Xmas instead of buying books via #Amazon you should donate to #Wikileaks.”

On the WikiLeaks Twitter feed, an angry post from the organisation said that if Amazon was “so uncomfortable with the first amendment, they should get out of the business of selling books”.

Amazon, widely known for its retail site, also offers various web services including hosting for other websites. It could not be reached for comment.

Kevin Bankston, a lawyer with the Electronic Frontier Foundation, said that Amazon’s decision to remove WikiLeaks was not a violation of the first amendment, as it was a private company.

But he added: “This certainly implicates first amendment rights to the extent that web hosts may, based on direct or informal pressure, limit the materials the American public has a first-amendment right to access.”

The decision to remove WikiLeaks was praised by US Republicans, some of whom have called on Mr Assange to be tried for treason.

“It is unfortunate that it took Amazon five months to terminate its relationships with WikiLeaks, and only after having political pressure applied,” said Peter King, a Republican congressman from New York.

“While I wish that Amazon had taken this step when US soldiers’ lives were first put in danger by WikiLeaks back in July, I am heartened that the company has finally corrected its action.”

WikiLeaks is now hosted on a Swedish internet service provider. This afternoon the website appeared to be functioning without problems.

Since it released the first tranche of cables on Sunday, WikiLeaks has also had to deal with “distributed denial of service” attacks, which is a computer attack intended to overwhelm a website and render it useless.

On Monday, a computer hacker known as the “Jester” claimed responsibility for temporarily taking down the WikiLeaks website on Sunday.

Mr Assange has not been seen in public since Sunday. Police and security services are believed to know where he is staying.

http://img130.imageshack.us/img130/7...ukttotechn.jpg

Apparently Amazon was contacted by leaders of the Republican Party in the States and due to this additional pressure, Amazon took the actions they did.

The 24 hour delay in closing it down was due to leagal reasons. Wikileaks were/are intitled by law to 24 hours notice. This they got once Amazon got contacted by Joe Lieberman - and then service was pulled.

Prior to this, Amazon had no qualms about continuing Wikileaks service, for example when the Afgan' logs were being released.
The latest excuse used is just something (its suspected) that they are trying for PR reasons for their latest actions. However its been pointed out by a number of media outlets that they could have used the same excuse a number of times before - but NEVER did!
It appears that when the Republican party makes demands, they get what they want and Amazon cave!

[Amalgam]

I don't think the various hobbling tactics are to remove the site totally, just make it harder for Mr. & Mrs. Average computer user to stumble across the material without some effort.

Apparently the really 'worry' is the banking material to be released sometime soon.

[LetsThinkBIG]

Can someone make a setp by step simple guide to downloading the files?
including encryptors etc etc .. ANything so i can get my hands on them

cheers

[Degag]

Can someone explain this to me? Where do Wikileaks get these files from? Is what they're doing illegal?

[RobbieTheRobber]

Originally Posted by Degag

Can someone explain this to me? Where do Wikileaks get these files from? Is what they're doing illegal?

Yes i believe releasing classified or private information onto the net is illegal, but not as illegal as some of the actions of the entities on which they are tryng to report on. IMHO

[KyussBishop]

No, what they are doing is not illegal. They are a whistleblowing website, who accept documents leaked to them from whistleblowers, and release them on the website.

A whistleblower is a person who learns of corruption, wrongdoing or other information in the public interest, and who publically releases documents/evidence of this corruption/wrongdoing etc..

Protection of whistleblowers and organizations publishing important leaked information (traditionally newspapers, but the internet is changing things now), which is in the public interest, are extremely important parts of democracy, as they are some of the primary tools responsible for exposing corruption.

In the past, whistleblowers would approach newspapers in order to publish and expose evidence of corruption, but today newspapers are relatively ineffective in this purpose and governments can force them to conceal information (many newspapers/media outlets are effectively in service to their home countries government now anyway).

If a whistleblower sends documents to WikiLeaks, they have a robust system in place to ensure the safety of the documentation/evidence, and also go to great efforts to maximize publicity for that documentation.